Mr E's immigration application was refused because the firm gave the wrong deadline...
Mr E instructed the firm to make an application for indefinite leave to remain for him and his family. Mr E provided all the information that the firm requested but the application was rejected. Mr E believed this was because of errors made by the firm.
Mr E requested that we investigate his complaints, which included that the firm provided incorrect advice about the date that his application could be submitted.
We concluded that the service provided was unreasonable.
Mr E’s application was refused because the deadline was missed. When the firm informed Mr E of the deadline, they provided a date that was three weeks later than the correct one. The correct deadline was stated on the application form and this also explained that the application would be refused if any of the requirements were not met.
We also concluded that the firm should have been aware of the recently updated legislation that was relevant to Mr E’s case. They therefore should have been able to accurately advise Mr E of the correct deadline.
The firm’s work was of no value to Mr E as the application was always going to be rejected because of the firm’s error. We proposed that the firm provide Mr E with a full refund of their fees. We also proposed that the firm reimburse Mr E for the money he paid to the Home Office for his application.
In addition, we considered that the service caused Mr E significant distress, which could have been avoided had their service been reasonable. We proposed that compensation within our exceptional award was paid to Mr E to compensate him for the emotional impact of their unreasonable service.
Guidance: Our approach to determining complaints | Legal Ombudsman
Guidance: Our approach to putting things right | Legal Ombudsman
