Sigh. So the saga continues. There is still no equality regarding British citizenship via British mothers.
I've been waiting for news announcing the results of committee meetings by the House of Commons and the House of Lords regarding proposed changes to the requirements for British citizenship via British mothers. Thanks to Michael Turberville, I learned that the House of Commons committee meeting was on 1 Nov, and the House of Lords meeting was 17 Nov to remove the fee of £550. Michael shares this exciting news on his website: The exemption to the fee for 4C applications will then come into effect on the 22 November.
I should be very pleased, right? Well, initially it does indeed sound like very good news however it turns out we are still not being granted automatic British citizenship via our British mothers! I learned this from an anonymous comment on my blog - The fee has been eliminated but the citizenship ceremony fee remains (£80).
This is the latest official news from the Home Office about this change to the law:
Registration of people born before 1983 to British mothers
19 November 2010
From Monday 22 November 2010 those applying under this section will not be required to pay an application fee for registration. Those who are applying in the UK will still need to pay an administrative fee of £80, as this is forwarded to the local authority to cover the administrative cost of a citizenship ceremony. The £80 administrative fee should be paid when making the application, but will be refunded if the application is unsuccessful. Those applying overseas will be required to pay a consular fee.
So the discrimination continues! We are expected to make an application and pay a fee for a citizenship ceremony and attend the ceremony. We still don't have 100% parity with the children of British father's. If my father had been British, citizenship would be automatic - no registration required, no fee at all and no ceremony!
By the way, my mother is a British war bride. The majority of people affected by this change in the law are children of British war brides. It's disgusting that the UK is still refusing to give us our right to automatic citizenship. Why are we being treated as second-class citizens?
I'm entitled to automatic citizenship via my British mother - that is citizenship without any conditions. This latest news is just changing the amount of the fee, and it was never just about the money! It's a matter of equality. The administrative fee of £80 to cover the administrative cost of a citizenship ceremony, is ridiculous! Why are we required to attend a ceremony? The citizenship ceremony is for immigrants who seek to become British citizens. The children of British mothers are not immigrants!
I'm also outraged to read that the £80 administrative fee...will be refunded if the application is unsuccessful, which implies that we are still having to apply for our right to citizenship and that we can be denied! The word, application seems to me to be the same as registration. It's blatatant discrimination to require an application (which can be denied) and the ceremony (which is for immigrants!).
Why are we still being denied our right to automatic British citizenship?
Edited to add: For your information - via the UK Home Office website:
Applicants for British citizenship use application Form UKM
"Registration as a British citizen by certain persons born before 1983 to British mothers"
Notice it states: Application for registration as a British citizen by a person born before 1983 to a British mother
Completing the application form (note the required information on Form UKM before approval for citizenship!)
Yes, the fee has been greatly reduced but we are required to register - and then (possibly) be approved for British citizenship before attending the required ceremony (which is for foreigners without a British parent). Blatant discrimination!
Related posts from my blog:
Changes to the law on citizenship: Children of British mothers
British Citizenship - discrimination
Guardian's Liberty Clinic - query about British citizenship
Related blog post via Jims Blog :
UK Continues to discriminate against children of female British citizens
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
A British woman who gives birth to her child in the USA currently has to pay $277 in application fees and postage for a consular birth certificate that will allow her child to then apply for a UK passport. UK citizenship is not automatic for the child - the mother has to choose to apply for it. 80 pounds sounds like a bargain to me in comparison! The passport then costs $140 as opposed to the 49 pounds it would cost in the UK.
ReplyDeleteI had had a little go-round with the Embassy in Washington DC as initially they refused to accept the US birth certificate I sent them because it was not issued at the hospital where my children were born. The hospital here does not issue birth certificates. The city does, and ONLY if the parents ask (and pay) for one. Most of my kids' classmates don't have a birth ceritificate!
I don't think you understand this issue. It's not about the money! If my British parent was male, this would not be an issue and I would have been eligible to apply for my British passport with no need to make an application and attend a citizenship ceremony and no need to pay the fee.
ReplyDeleteMy complaint is that the UK continues to discriminate against British mothers. We still don't have 100% parity with the children of British father's!
I suppose the fight will have to continue until you're not required to go through the ceremony like a newly minted citizen.
ReplyDeleteTo AA's point - that's not the same all over the States though. My kids all had to have a certificate of live birth here in Illinois, but I never had to get anything else to get them their British passports. Can't remember what the costs were but the youngest is only 7 so it's not eons ago.
You're right, I'm not ready to give up the fight for equality. I'm not at all happy about this new ruling.
ReplyDeleteIt's not just the ceremony requirement that annoys me, it's the "application" which can be denied. There shouldn't be any "conditions". An application that can be rejected is wrong. I'm entitled to automatic citizenship via my British mother!
If my father was British instead of my mother, I would have been entitled to claim my British citizenship. Requiring an application/ceremony is blatant discrimination!
Thanks for the additional info regarding the situation in the USA.
Sigh, indeed.
ReplyDeleteWhat's particularly sad is the complete unawareness of so many who this process targets. We've been getting the word out on this directly to the people most concerned for months, yet many still simply refuse to believe it. They are so deeply British, and have such faith in their country of birth, they can't accept the idea that they're "not good enough" to pass on citizenship by descent as their male countrymen can.
And those who've accepted that the government chooses to refuse parity then look at that degrading application form meant for aliens and get really upset. [no, we're not pederasts, terrorists, felons, bankrupt...]
I suspect the fee revocation is supposed to end our "complaints" once and for all. I have no intention of shutting up. It's time to publish about this outside the UK.
Anyone who shares my dudgeon is welcome to contact me at
Elbaker [at] post [dot] harvard [dot] edu
I'm sure that you know only too well what I think about all this! Flighty xx
ReplyDeleteThank you so much Elis. I appreciate your support in this campaign. I think you're right about the UK government expecting us to be happy with the fee revocation - and they think that will be that. I'm not willing to give up the fight for equality and I'm so pleased to know others (like you) feel the same way.
ReplyDeleteThanks again. I will contact you in the near future to discuss this issue in more detail via your email.
I just noticed your comment, Flighty. I do indeed know how you feel - and I appreciate your support in this matter, as always. Thank you very much! xx
ReplyDeleteGood, let's talk. Just wanted to add that it's not just people outside the UK who are uninformed...this comment is just one of many in the same vein that I've received:
ReplyDelete“I spoke to my cousin in England this week regarding this subject and he said that this sounded like a very archaic law to him and he said it would NOT be true in today's world. As we all know, there was a time when men ruled Britannia but in today's world there is equality for everyone and a law like this would not stand up in Britain.”
For whatever reason, (shame on the part of the perpetrators?), "our" issue is virtually invisible, which is why your efforts and Michael Turbeville's continuing campaign are so important. Keep up the good work!
Cheers, Elis
Elis, I know only too well how much this issue is simply not heard about here or conveniently ignored by some British people. Unfortunately, the attitude from many Brits seems to be that they are already British so why should they care about a bunch of people who are fighting for their right to British citizenship. It's disturbing to learn how many people don't care anything about equality in the UK.
ReplyDeleteAs far as getting publicity about the issue here, I've found a distinct lack of interest. It's no wonder so many people are completely unaware of this blatant discrimination. I do think (hope) there would be an outcry if this citizenship inequality was reported in the news and the details were more widely known.
It's a real battle to get the word out but I am trying to - as much as possible, mostly via this blog and through Twitter. Thank you for your encouraging words - I really needed them today.
The comment by "Almost American" is incorrect. A consular birth certificate is recommended but is optional. Consular registration should not be confused with citizenship registration.
ReplyDeleteAs you say, the problem is not so much with the cost, but rather the condescending tone of the UK Border Agency. It seems that no opportunity is lost to remind us of our "inferior" status.
Thank you for clarifying that (about a consular birth certificate).
ReplyDeleteIndeed, it's very disheartening when people insist on remarking about the cost (and ignore the whole picture). It's not about the money!
The blatant inequality that the UK insists on continuing to implement is what is at the heart of this issue, and being regarded second-class British citizens is an added insult.
Sorry - I didn't mean to imply that I was not supportive of your argument! I am 100% with you on the unfairness of it!
ReplyDeleteBTW, I know the consular birth certificate is supposed to be optional, but when I applied for a passport for my now 7 year-old they initially rejected the application because his American birth certificate was not issued at the hospital. They then accepted the US birth certificate in order to issue the consular one, which got him his passport. Grr - they are just as bad as dealing with US immigration.
Thank you. I'm very pleased to know you agree with the unfairness and you are supportive.
ReplyDeleteI'm sorry to hear about the difficulties you had regarding getting a passport for your son.
Hi Maureen: To repeat a previous comment, there is something more sinister about this "citizenship" we acquire. It can be taken away at the discretion of the Home Secretary! This proves that this is not true citizenship on the internationally accepted principle that a parent can pass his or her nationality to their children.
ReplyDeleteHi Greg, thank you for making that important point! It's bad enough that we are being told we have to apply (register) for what should be our automatic right. It's much worse indeed if this route to "citizenship"(via registration), can be taken away.
ReplyDeleteIt proves that this new ruling offering us British citizenship via registration is second-class citizenship. It also emphasises the inequality we continue to experience compared to children of British fathers.
Wow, Michael Turberville has been on this for years! That’s amazing.
ReplyDeleteYou’re all correct – this is ridiculous!
I am currently trying to apply using Form UKM. While I’m grateful for the fee reduction (it was nearly 1k in US$!!), the whole process is insane.
My youngest brother was born in 1982, but if he was born just a few months later, I would have to go through this whole process, and he wouldn’t. How does that make sense?
Now that the fee is gone, my two biggest hurdles are getting my mom’s British passport (she was a kid when her parents moved the family to the US, and hasn’t had the passport in decades), and getting two recommendations by “Professionals” (according to a list on the website). Now I don’t know a British citizen who isn’t related to me, so I need to find two US “Professionals”. Most everyone I know are just regular people going about their business, trying to feed and clothe their families. Out of all the “Professionals” on the list, I found one friend who’s an RN, and one who’s a teacher. I don’t know Drs or lawyers, CEOs or government officials.
There shouldn’t even BE hurdles. My English husband didn’t believe me at first, when I told him about this process.
I’m glad my daughter won’t have to go through this. I’m glad I’ll be able to gain my birth-right citizenship, and move my family to the UK. Then I can help a little bit more in the fight.
WHAT???
ReplyDeleteHow could it be taken away? Please clarify.
Good grief! Hard to believe this could be any worse than it already is by the insulting, stupid ["please tell us if you're a terrorist..."] form they've imposed.
Hello Tey, it's worse than ridiculous, it's blatant discrimination! There is still no equality regarding British citizenship via British mothers.
ReplyDeleteI can understand your eagerness to get your British citizenship but it's a shame you can't wait until we are granted citizenship without conditions(registration and a ceremony).
It's true that the £550 fee has been removed, but it's unacceptable that we must provide two references and fill out a form intended for immigrants, not to mention pay £80 and attend a citizenship ceremony.
Elis, Yes, under certain conditions the Home Secretary has the power to revoke someone’s British Nationality.
ReplyDeleteI'm a bit confused about this issue. My mother is British and my father is American. I was born in a British hospital but was both a British and American birth certificates. So when I came over to the UK, I just had to apply for a British passport as I was under the impression that I'm already a citizen. Hence, the British birth certificate. Is this issue in regards to people who do not have a British birth certificate?
ReplyDeleteNever mind. Was born in January 1983 so this doesn't apply to me...
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteActually, that's a bit misleading. There's a legal distinction between "nationality" and "citizenship": our problem is that we're being lumped in with all the other immigrants, who are in primarily seeking naturalization, right to abode, etc. We're just fighting for the citizenship we would have had automatically if only our mothers had been men.
ReplyDeleteIt's so unnecessarily stupid.
You're right Elis. Immigrants seeking to become naturalized British citizens are a different group and we should not be included with them.
ReplyDeleteThe concern is that the form (UKM) appears to require the same information that anyone without a British parent would also have to submit. It raises the question about whether gaining British citizenship via this route (registration) is considered different (the threat that it can be taken away) to citizenship via our British mothers. Indeed, I think it appears to be so which confirms the undeniable fact that we are not equal to children of British fathers.
New End Studio,
ReplyDeleteThank you. I'm very pleased you discovered my blog and that you are finding my posts and discussions about this citizenship issue helpful.
It's shocking and disgraceful that back in the 1970s the Home Office told you that "I didn't rate since I was asking for citizenship through my Mother." Appalling! It's bad enough that this blatant form of sexism took place in the 1970s but here we are - still fighting for the same right as children of British fathers!
You (and Tey) have both raised another very important point to consider. How many of our mothers (particularly since the vast majority of them are quite elderly now) still have their old passports? If that is a required document, that's made this situation much worse for many of us!
Thank you for sharing your mother's background story and the problems you are now having regarding your mother's passport. I think we need to bring all these stories to light and I greatly appreciate your input.
I appreciate your offer to help. I think your story may be very useful. Please contact me via email.
Thanks again.
Tisha, the issue is regarding children born abroad to British mothers before a date that the Home Office has arbitrarily picked.
ReplyDeleteAs of 13 Jan, 2010, I finally have the right to claim my British citizenship (via my British mother) however I don't consider the path to British citizenship an entitlement since it is dependent on specific conditions.
There was a change to the process recently (Monday 22 November 2010) and the £550 fee has been removed but I still don't consider this path to British citizenship a fair entitlement. It was never just about the money!
This route to British citizenship is dependent on specific conditions: submitting an application, paying a fee (£80) and attending a ceremony.
We still don't have 100% parity with the children of British father's. If my father had been British, citizenship would be automatic - no registration required, no fee at all and no ceremony!
It's unjustified discrimination.
We all agree that the law is wrong, but the harsh reality is that the general public is overwhelmed by so much news of horrible, truly vicious human rights violations, and by such fear of/anger towards "immigrants" (and that's how we're seen, alas), that there is no sympathy for our situation. As people point out in discussions on this blog and elsewhere, we can just lump it and fill out the form - or, as many did earlier this year, lump it, fill out the form, and pay that absurd fee.
ReplyDeleteI'm preparing some articles on the subject because another reality is that politicians - unmoved by letters, petitions, pleas and reasoning - can be shamed into doing the right thing, especially when they realize their actions are being watched (and judged) from 'outside' their comfy little kingdoms.
My English mum wasn't a man, so I'm personally effected, but I got into this because of research I (an anthropologist) did on British war brides in the USA. Several remembered receiving unpleasantness because they were seen as women who 'ran away' from the troubles, going to 'a good life in the land of plenty'. I believe some of that resentment filtered into the law [birth after 1961, etc].
Sadly, time has taken its toll, so I'm unable to get further details from those particular women. Since the newspapers I write for require substantiation, I need to find out more about these attitudes/experiences. If you've ever heard anything relevant, or know of anyone who may have some insights on this aspect of our issue, please let me know. You can also refer them to me directly at elbaker@post.harvard.edu
If any of you would like to help, feel free to contact me. All info will be confidential, of course, and if I need to refer to any specifics, I'll only do so with your permission. Please include 1]the basics (your country of birth, that of your parents and your children, and their nationality now), 2] this law's direct impact on your family. Feel free to add your views in more general terms. [don't worry about the writing - not seeking quotes at this point].
Hi Maureen
ReplyDeleteI have been travelling for the past month and just opened your blog to catch up on the news. I first have to comment on my elation at having my first ever British passport. Yes, I did register and go through the process. I have waited 64 years and I wasn't going to miss the opportunity. I must tell you that for the very FIRST time in my whole travelling life, I was not asked a SINGLE question at Heathrow when I landed. The officer swiped my NEW MICRO-CHIPPED passport and through I went. It was, for a brief moment, joyous!!! BUT, I am still devastated at the discrimination we face and to the "loss" of 540 pounds. It was an enormous sterling amount of money for me to accumulate. I gather, as no-one has commented, that this money will not be refunded under the new amendment??
I would also like to comment on the earlier reader whose cousin mentioned that the Britain of today would not tolerate this type of discriminatory laws. I am afraid that this is an illusion. After my appeal to the European Court, and from subsequent articles I have read in the past year of others' plights, I believe that Britain was forced into change, because of EU pressure. She did not willing make the change.
And, just to add to the broil, I don't know if any of you are familiar with the paying of British pensions to ex-pats? There is total injustice in the payment of the pension to residents of Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and some other smaller commonwealth countries. Once a resident of one of these countries (I am one) draws their pension (I draw mine next year), his/her pension is frozen at that amount and he/she will never receive another annual increase. Strangely, however, it does not apply to residents in 35 other countries including the EU, Switzerland and the USA. How does this work when every pensioner, wherever they settle, has paid their NI Contributions. When an International Consortium of pensioners' organisations representing those in Australia, South Africa and Canada sued the British Government in the EU Court of Human Rights in 2008, they lost. The EU Court ruled in favour of the British Government. One of the reasons given by the British defence was, that pensioners retiring to the listed countries are rich enough!! I beg yours?? How poor can you imagine those who settle in Switzerland and the USA, amoungst others, must be that they qualify for the annual increase?? This IS the Britain of today.
Hi Tim, I'm pleased to hear you got your British passport although it's a shame you had to pay the exhoritant fee of £540. As far as I know, the fee will not be refunded. It sounds like you consider it money well-spent though.
ReplyDeleteThank you for the information regarding
the paying of British pensions to ex-pats. I heard a bit about it in the news but didn't know all the details. It sounds like yet another disgraceful injustice.
Hi Maureen,
ReplyDeleteWell, I took the plunge and sent in my UKM application on Jan 4, and got a response from the UK embassy in DC on Jan 13 that they had sent it off to Liverpool. Exciting!
Although the main application fee has now been waived, the consular fee was $140 ($128 for "formatting", and $12 to mail my original docs back to me), and the ceremony will be another 80 pounds. So, it's by no means entirely free, but I do appreciate not having to shell out another 500 quid.
Responding to an issue mentioned in some of the posts, my dear old mother also had gotten rid of all her old British passports (bless her heart!). I noted that in my application and also included a copy of her father's birth certificate. The embassy was satisfied with that. Apparently, this is to cover rare cases where a British-born mother may not be eligible for citizenship.
Cheers,
Jeremy
Discrimination policy for British Mothers by British Government is not Good at all.
ReplyDeleteHi Jeremy, thank you for the information about your experience. I'm still fighting for the right to claim citizenship without the unfair conditions (UKM application plus a ceremony) but I can understand how some people such as yourself aren't willing to wait any longer. It sounds like you will soon be getting your citizenship, once your application is processed. I'm very pleased for you.
ReplyDeleteGreeting,
ReplyDeleteJust a quick note to say that the fight for full 'Parity' with the children of British Father's will never cease till we have full Parity! My mum first encountered the 'sexist' Home Office rules in 1950, and it took till 2003 to get the door partially opened, then opened further in Jan 2010, and the fee removal in Nov 2010.
Slowly each sex discrimiation difference is being chipped away. All the other's that still exist, the application form, the consular fee's, the citizenship ceremony (we are British from Birth from 'our' perspective!), the back ground checks, the police/terrorist checks, and all the other things that the children of British Father's Do Not have to do - fully eliminated.
I and other memebers of Campaigns pressure Parliament, other member's of Campaigns are going through the judiciary. Every possible currently available option is being persued and if it is not, please advise and it will be! The downside to not having a written constitution in the UK, is the political landscape changes at every election, so if and when any sort of immigration, nationality, citizenship bill or statitutory instrument etc hits parliament - we will be there. There are well over 20,000 who have already registered UKM. So we are not just a fringe group. I am always extremely pleased to see Maureen and other's who dedicate their time and effort as well to our group cause of full Parity. Maureen, you have a highly useful blog page that I always recommend to UKM people who contact me via Campaigns.
Sex discrimination is wrong and is illegal in the UK and EU.
Full Parity and nothing less.
Michael
Thanks for the update about your continued fight for full parity, Michael. I'm very pleased to know you are still pursuing this issue with so much determination!
ReplyDeleteThank you also for recommending my blog to UKM people who contact you via CAMPAIGNS (CHILDREN AND MATERNAL PARENTS AGAINST IMMIGRATION & GOVERNMENT NATIONALITY SITUATION
Thanks again.
Hi, I feel I can't continue without posting a huge thanks for all the good work done. It has been invaluable that my mother born 1920's is now able to gift us UK citizenship- as she surely served her country well and better than many men I can assure you.
ReplyDeleteBrilliant work, keep it up and thank you, thank you !!
I'm very pleased that you found my blog useful, and I appreciate your comment thanking me!
ReplyDeleteThe credit for all the hard work over the years about this blatant inequality really goes to Michael Turberville though: http://www.turberville.org/IND/campaigns/
Michael started his campaign years ago, and I believe it's thanks to him, that we are finally being granted our right to claim British citizenship, albeit with some unfair conditions - but it's still a major success.
I've simply tried to highlight the issue via twitter and my blog. I think all the publicity has been a huge help by putting pressure on the Home Office to finally provide the right to British citizenship to all children of British mothers.
Hi Maureen- great teamwork regardless ! and my thanks of course extend to Michael !
ReplyDeleteAs a note, I wonder why, in the light of the removal of an application fee effective 22 December 2010, I was still been asked to pay the equivalent of GBP700 on 27 January 2011, for the application to be submitted from the British Embassy in another country. Surely GBP 700 does not represent the'consular fee' ?
I have since returned to the embassy, but they insist this figure is correct.
The ongoing discrimination in policy between the status/ application of a British father and a British mother is indeed unacceptable.
Hmm. the discrepancy in the fees is indeed questionable. I think you should contact the British Home Office about it.
ReplyDeleteYou are right, the ongoing discrimination is unjustified and totally unacceptable.
Look what has popped up on the govt site for planned fee changes...
ReplyDeletehttp://www.theyworkforyou.com/wms/?id=2011-02-28a.9WS.1&c=27612#c27612
It appears because they were coerced to removed them, that they are getting their petty own back by trying to bring the fee's for 4C - UKM applications back in April 2011.
You can find Theresa May and Damian Green's email addresses on the www.parliament.uk website, a note to say NO to the fee increase and that they should actually be working towards giving us FULL PARITY with the children of British Father's - the dutch had almost the same exact previous sex discriminatory legislation and they ammended their's in 2010 to have 'full parity', we are still in Limbo/half way house on it!
Thanks for the info, Michael. It's not clear to me from studying the increased fees, what the fee increase will be exactly for our situation. I think the Home Office needs to clarify exactly how much the fees will be for registration for children of British mothers - although obviously *any* fee charged is wrong and unacceptable, as is the need to register and attend a ceremony! As you say, we still don't have parity with children of British fathers.
ReplyDeleteAt least the news about fee increases means we have an opportunity for this issue of citizenship inequality to be publicised. The more this issue is made known to members of the public and we complain to Government, the more likely we will get a result.
I really think everyone should just refuse to apply for UKM and join the campaign to fight for equality. Write to your MP as well as Damian Green and Theresa May. Please don't accept discrimination!
That's very good to know that the Dutch changed their law last year. Excellent news! - and very encouraging for our fight for full parity!
I finally got a fully list of all those who can apply for "Registration" as British. When you read this list, you will see why we are really made to feel as second class citizens when Our Mother was British! IF Our Father had been British, they would accept us without deference...
ReplyDeleteother than 4C UKM Registration as Adults, there are the following:
Adults can register as British citizens under a number of provisions:
Section 1(4) - people born in the UK who did not become British automatically
Section 4A - British Overseas Territories citizens
Section 4B - British nationals with no other citizenship
Section 4(2) - British nationals resident in the UK
Section 5 - nationals of Gibraltar
Section 10 - following renunciation of citizenship of the UK and Colonies status before 1983
Section 13 - following renunciation of British citizenship after 1983.
Schedule 2 - stateless provisions
Hong Kong 1997 Act - British nationals with a connection with Hong Kong.
In addition there are 7 provisions by which children under 18 can apply for registration.
All of those applicants are required to pay a fee.
I have that thing called a rather bitter taste left in my mouth over their failure to give full Parity as promised by the all party committee in TWO Queen's speechs!
Michael
www.turberville.org
Hi Michael, yes it's extremely annoying and disheartening that this inequality issue is still not resolved.
ReplyDeleteAll we can do is to keep up the pressure on the politicians about this matter and also keep spreading the word about this discrimination.
Personally, I'm not prepared to accept this route to British citizenship which is dependent on (unfair)conditions: submitting an application, paying a fee (£80) and attending a ceremony. We should have 100% parity with the children of British father's.
almost immediastely after the bill became law & the 'new'UKM application was available - in May 2010 I applied to the Canadain high commission in Ottawa paying the then fee of £550 ($846.66). My application as expected was approved & I attended the citizenship swearing in Toronto at the end of September 2010, along with an added fee of $221. Following this another $227 for a passport.
ReplyDeleteWas it worth it - yes, & it wasn't, so I thought about the money.
Here is the bigger question for those like me that went out of the starting block then finding out after the fact the application fee has been waived.
Is there any recourse or method to apply for a refund of my application fee?
Thanks
Linda in Toronto
Hello Linda,
ReplyDeleteSorry, I don't know about a refund. I suggest that you write to the UK Home Office about it.
I have started a new blog about this issue.
ReplyDeletePlease post any further comments about this blatant discrimination on the new site:
http://britishbydescent.wordpress.com/
I have been reading the info on the british passport agency and getting confused pls help.
ReplyDeleteI have dutch nationality as i my father was Dutch but my mother was english and i was born in Holland I was born 5 /10 1973 ( age 39) and moved back to the uk 12/10/ 1973 aged one week which from then on i have been a permanant resident of the uk. I have worked in the Uk and have paid tax NI and have a government pension scheme. I was married to an english man in 1996 and have 2 daughters aged 10 and 13 yrs. My husband and i are separtaing and i was worried that if any thing withthe law of EU in the future i could be asked to leave and also not be able to see my children. Do you think it is nescesary for me to British Citizen and if so could you give me a beak down of the cost of doing this. Do i have to pay just £80.00 or £1,500 tried every telphone no possible and getting no where
Any information or contact details would be appricated as this is a great worry I have been looking at the website and looks like i would be suitalbe for ukm but still dont understand the costs.
Maureen, you are doing a wonderful job fighting for Parity and I support you 100 percent.
ReplyDeleteMy situation is as follows. Born in Dec 1973 in Nairobi to a Mother born in Mombasa 1944. Mother was a British Protected Person at the time of my birth. She registered as a CUKC with a right of abode sometime in 1975.
I applied under UKM and my application was rejected on the grounds that my mother was a BPP at the time of my birth and registered as a CUKC after my Birth.
If I was to add that my maternal grandmother was a CUKC at the time of my birth, and also from my Paternal side, my Grandmother was a CUKC at the time of my birth. Both Grandmothers wereborn in India around 1918
Would this change my situation at all, can I appeal this decision of my UKM? I applied under the assumption each case is at the discretion of the Home office, and that one of the embassy staff had indicated that in a similar case, another person had a successful outcome... Maureen any comments on the above would be highly appreciated. Thank you in advance.
I am in a similar situation - born overseas to a UK born mother. So far I have refused to take up UK Nationality under the current circumstances as the ceremony involves an oath of allegiance to the Queen and all her descendants or some such Victorian nonsense - no chance! however, my "Indefinate Leave To Remain" is now 13 years old and I can't see them allowing me to keep it for much longer...
ReplyDeleteHi everyone, my case falls in the UKM PRE-83 category and I recently got this reply from the Home Office obtained after contacting my local MP.
ReplyDeletevvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
Citizenship by descent – children of British mothers
*** Historically British fathers could pass on their citizenship to children born abroad but British mothers could not. Since 1983, British mothers have been able to pass on their British citizenship in the same way as British fathers.
*** It would not have been right to impose British citizenship retrospectively on individuals born abroad to British mothers before the law changed, whether or not they wanted it and regardless of any problems which British citizenship might cause them. Individuals born abroad to British mothers before 1983 can therefore apply to register as British citizens. There is no charge for the application, except for the citizenship ceremony fee of £80.00.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
From this response I get the feeling that they're trying to turn things on us, as if British Citizenship was something to feared. How about granting the same rights to all children of British mothers - which would get rid of the sex/age discrimination still in effect - and give the opportunity of those who are not interested or don't like it to be "imposed on them retrospectively" to simply fill a form and give it up no questions asked?
Would love to read your comments.
Chris
Hello Chris. I am daughter of a British mother, I was born in 1962 and have been resident in the UK for over 23 years....most of my adult life. I came here with a Right of Abode sticker which I first obtained in 1983. For around 20 years I just posted my old and new passport to the Home Office and the ROA sticker was inserted in the new one. Then they decided you would have to reapply as a new application EVERY time and charge you the hefty fee of 225. each time. I could almost swallow the fee, it's filling out the same form, with the same info over and over I find actually quite demeaning, especially as their own bumf reads 'ROA is a statutory right, you either have it or you don't.' Obviously they decided I 'have it' 30 plus years ago... To add insult to injury, normally it used to take approx 3 weeks to get the sticker inserted in the new passport. This time, I have been waiting 2 months, and I know of 2 other people who sent their in the same time who are also still waiting. Why this retrograde step? Yes, the rules were changed so I could now get a passport through my mother-BUT (here's the problem) they require her British passport. Well, she's been deceased for over ten years and as she died in Canada, and had dementia in her last years, no one in the family knows what happened to ANY of her documents. It is a rather odd requirement anyway, as most British women who went abroad around 60 years probably had citizenship in the countries where they migrated and held those passports instead of continuing with British ones (my mum had both.) Ao it seems this form of discrimination is still going on, and perhaps has even got a little worse.
DeleteI will soon be applying for the British Passport using the UKM route. My mom is a naturalized South African and never possessed a British passport however when I read the guide, it seems as if the her passport is only required if you don't have her birth certificate. As per the guide :"Please send the following documents:
ReplyDelete• 1Your passport; and
• Your full birth certificate (one which includes the name of your parent(s), (which should be requested from the relevant authorities in your country of origin); and
• Your mother’s full birth certificate; and either
• Her certificate of naturalisation or registration as a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies (or, before 1 January 1949, as a British subject); or
• Papers showing her legal adoption; or
• Her expired citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies passport"
Hi Maureen - I am a Canadian citizen, who submitted a UKM application to the Home Office over a year ago, and received a rejection last spring. The HO's rationale was that my mother, who was a Soviet war bride marrying a British subject in 1944, acquired her citizenship automatically not by registration (the latter requirement only applying to post-1948 marriages). Therefore, the HO stated, I do not have the right of abode under section 2(2) of the Immigration Act, 1971. I filed a reconsideration application last April and have not received any response from them at all yet. I argued in my reconsideration application that the HO's position discriminates on the basis of sex, i.e. if my mother had been a man who married a British woman, she would have been naturalized or registered, and hence I would meet the requirement in s.2(2). Also, it discriminates on the basis of age, since women married after 1948 (i.e. those born after 1930), would receive their citizenship by registration rather than automatically. Do you know of any similar cases? Also, isn't 7 months beyond a reasonable amount of time to decide a reconsideration application? Any suggestions what to do next? Perhaps I should contact a sympathetic member of the House of Lords? Thank you.
ReplyDeleteHi - any input on why the UKM form which changed after I did mine in 2012, now appears to be an application and not registration? I heard that these requirements/information had to be removed but I see they still are there?
ReplyDeleteThanks for this blog. I'm trying to get the UKM form done - I have references in the UK, but I'm a bit stymied by the requirements for the passport, birth certificate, etc. Why? Because I read on another thread that you need certified copies. I can get notarized, but not certified. The hospital I was born in was torn down years ago. My mom is 92, and I doubt she has some of the needed forms for her end.
ReplyDeleteSo my question: can I used an expired passport, and a copy of my birth certificate, and get those notarized? I don't want to waste time and money, if possible! I have quite a few relatives (first cousins, etc.) in the UK, but I don't know if that will help in proving my lineage.
Thanks for reading and your help.
Any up date about the statue of the children of UKM registered persons ? Mean born abroad children
ReplyDelete