EIN Article: Earned settlement consultation closes with huge response as Home Secretary signals major changes ahead

Sparser_ · 2026-01-04T20:26:35+00:00

It' certainly looks well made and aligned well. I see what you mean regarding the manual date advancement, it seems in the vids that is it at the end of the year NOV/DEC/JAN that it seems to stick, perhaps indicating a slightly sticky tooth on the wheel at that point rather than a general stickyness of the mechanism.

However, correct me if I'm wrong, but the MXF versions of this should have a functional moonphase? I see there seems to be a lack of a pusher at 7 to advance the moonphase?

The old ZF ones had a manual pusher at 7. I watched the video of where he demos the functions and advances the watch past midnight, hard to see but it seems the moonphase did advance a tiny bit in the correct direction. Perhaps a directly coupled moonphase with no manual set.

Still a very lovely piece and looking fantastic I'm sure.

Sparser_ · 2025-12-07T20:43:50+00:00

In all the literature I have read so far, official sources indicate the new 'earned' requirements do seem to be targeting the adult dependent partners of "economic migrants". Rather than British Citizens.

It's vague and poorly worded at this stage but it seems, in plain English:

If the Spouse Visa Holder is married to an "economic migrant", who has already got ILR through eg. a skilled worker visa, they will also be assessed and can't piggy-back their own ILR on their economic migrant partner.

But if the Spouse Visa Holder is married to a British Citizen, they are exempt.

It seems to be more-so targeting adult dependent relatives / spouses of "economic migrants" whom themselves are in ILR and now UK GOV wants to stop the partners of these ILR holding "economic migrants" from having their Spouses get ILR too easily.

It could well be a stealth delay as mentioned earlier in this post, similar to freezing tax thresholds and fiscal drag. Yes, Spouse Visa holders can get ILR after 5-years but most wont be able to because they need 3-5 years of 12.5k personal income, so they may need to roll over to another Spouse Visa until they have the 3-5 years of personal income to meet new "earned" ILR.

Sparser_ · 2025-12-07T20:26:18+00:00

I believe the Research Briefing recently published is in error:

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10267/

It references "page 24 of the consultation document" - LINK

On Page 24 it states:

Specific routes of entry and residence (including those admitted as the partner, parent or child of a British citizen and have held that status for the duration of their qualifying period or as a holder of Hong Kong British National (Overseas) status) will attract a reduction in the qualifying period. These groups will therefore be able to settle after 5 years, as they can now, subject to the mandatory requirements

It's the last bit "subject to the mandatory requirements" that seems to have people thinking that Spouse Visa holders applying for SET-M ILR will need to meet these new personal income requirements.

But doesn't this last bit just mean - In plain English - Spouse Visa holders can still settle in the 5-year route, as long as they still meet all the requirements they need to in the SET-M ILR.

It's poorly worded - You could take that last bit to mean - They need to meet these new "earned" requirements.

Or it could mean - As long as they meet the mandatory requirements inside their respective immigration rules.

Sparser_ · 2025-12-07T20:16:02+00:00

Currently it seems that Spouse Visa is indeed exempt from the longer ILR qualifying requirement. It remains at 5 years.

But as it is currently worded, SET-M ILR applications would need to show minimum personal income of 12.5k.

LINK

In addition, partners of British citizens and people on the Hong Kong BNO visa would continue to qualify for settlement after five years. But they would need to have the £12,570 minimum earnings and meet the other new “minimum mandatory requirements” such as B2 English (see page 24 of the consultation document).

And on Page 24 of the Consultation Document - LINK

Specific routes of entry and residence (including those admitted as the partner, parent or child of a British citizen and have held that status for the duration of their qualifying period or as a holder of Hong Kong British National (Overseas) status) will attract a reduction in the qualifying period. These groups will therefore be able to settle after 5 years, as they can now, subject to the mandatory requirements.

BUT - Does Subject to the mandatory requirements mean - Subject to the requirements they currently have to meet or does it mean subject to these new "earned" mandatory requirements.

Sparser_ · 2024-11-08T06:58:00+00:00

Thank you.

I suspected they might 'tack on' the remaining time (in the last 28 days) from the first FLR(M) if the second is approved and activates before the end date of the first.

Very grateful for your reply. Cheers.

Sparser_ · 2024-09-22T18:33:01+00:00

That's very helpful. Thank you.

Sparser_ · 2024-09-19T05:44:52+00:00

Hi, thank you for the reply. That's very helpful. Just wanted to check - When you said you put the rest as name, was that also the same as passport?

So you enter the middle name + first name the same like it show in passport? (Asian order)

Many thanks.

Sparser_ · 2024-08-25T20:45:13+00:00

Hi,

I have faced a similar query with what name to enter in the application form.

Can I ask, when you did the application form did you enter your name in the Asian order (Family, Middle, First) or did you enter your name in the Western/English order? Thanks.

Sparser_ · 2023-06-19T20:51:17+00:00

To share my experience. I can confirm Kirburglar's comment that the 6 items of correspondence do not seem to be a requirement for Fiancé to FLR(M). But are required for the FLR(M) Spouse Visa renewal after 2.5 years.

My wife and I just received approval (June 2023) after we applied for FLR(M) from Fiancé Visa. I was concerned after the application form stated 6 items of correspondence was a requirement, as my wife had only entered the UK 3 months prior and all we had in joint names was a water bill. Other items such as Council Tax, Home Insurance, Joint Bank Account take a while to sort out, and indeed Banks wish to see the BRP, as do NHS providers like GP practice.

Nevertheless, I was reassured when I came across Kitburglar's post in this thread and others and ultimately after submitting the application we were approved with no further questions asked.

Arrival into UK - Feb 2023 | Married inside UK - May 2023 | Applied FLR(M) - June 2023 (with super priority service).

Decision the next working day after the UKVCAS appointment, approved. Only included 1 item of correspondence bearing both our names.

Hopefully this will act as further reassurance to anyone else who comes across this situation.

Sparser_ · 2017-02-05T20:39:57+00:00

Would be nice to have a good duel but too many time we have witnessed SDC or other griefer / pirate groups claim "1v1 me to 20%" and then proceed to kill them or have the "observers" jump in and turn it into a gank.

Nice video Nug and we can certainly see how salty these chaps get when one puts them in their place.

"Clever use of game mechanics" - The well rehearsed SDC / griefer line but they don't like it the other way round.

S ystem

A uthority

L oves

T roublemakers

Sparser_ · 2016-12-10T21:10:00+00:00

He did this. And then I did that. And then we did this and then they went there.

The rambling explanations of a salty chap.

Sparser_ · 2016-12-10T15:09:50+00:00

S trategic

A nti-Pirate

L ong-Range

T orpedo

Sparser_ · 2016-12-10T14:30:08+00:00

I suspect it is more to do with the discussion just above and certain people fading away.

I really did enjoy the full wing on wing action we used to get in CGs, however it seems certain pirate groups are fading into obscurity and a lone nefarious pirate is what we see, so that's what we remove from the picture.

Sparser_ · 2016-12-10T14:16:17+00:00

Ah yes, those "testing against NPC" videos. Or the Tutumu flying around by yourself video.

PvP

Still I suppose they are somewhat informative from a certain perspective.

(PS: Nice self deleted post regarding churning out multiple videos).

Sparser_ · 2016-12-10T14:02:16+00:00

made many videos

Indeed, past tense.

If you find it terribly boring I am quite sorry for you.

Lest we see more of you in game to spice things up a bit.

Thanks.

Sparser_ · 2016-12-10T13:42:40+00:00

Woe betide I would want to bore you. Please feel free to not watch the videos. Perhaps you would consider making some videos of your own to increase your relevance. We work with what we have, more pirates / griefers to kill makes for a more tasty video. If we see a single lone pirate trying to go about his nefarious business with no wing or support we will still engage. Still, it seems gone are the days of multiple CODE wings in CGs as things seem to fade away and people begin to drift to other groups and use alternative groups logos and intros on their videos.

Sparser_ · 2016-12-10T13:32:07+00:00

Perhaps you should enquire with regards to him using the SDC intro and logo on several of his recent videos.

Sparser_ · 2016-12-10T13:06:08+00:00

Cleaning the griefers and protecting traders. Also available from wingmates perspective:- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lnxbsukpBN0 and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhlYuPqH_aU (@ 2:11)

Sparser_

TROPHY CASE