EEA2 Application Processes

Dear Sir or Madam,

In light of your response on a previous FOI request (Service Levels
for EEA2 Applications), I am rather surprised that over 70% of
applications received by your agency are not decided within the
stipulated service level. As I understand the UKBA are legally
obliged to respond in due course through enabling legislation:

section 1.9 of chapter 5 "Residence Card
Applications" in European Casework Instructions
(http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/siteco...)
(the Six Month Rule) as called for in the implementation of
Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006.

I further note in your response to my previous FOI request, that
you are putting in place measures to conform to the service levels
that you are obligated to. In your response, Ms. Deans cites
particuarlly the following:

I can confirm that the Agency is taking measures to ensure that all
cases will be within service level agreements by November 2009.
These include:

• Recruitment of additional case working resource via internal
transfer of resource; recruitment of temporary staff and external
recruitment for fixed term appointment, casual and agency staff.
Indeed during the period from April to July 2009 the dedicated
resource for European Casework rose by over 500%.

• From 1st June 2009 introducing an initial assessment on receipt
of applications submitted under European Legislation to ensure the
validity of the same.

What would be useful at this stage (and I believe in the public
interest) is the following:

1) From 2008 to current, what has been the average time to decide
an EEA2 residence permit (from receipt of application to closure of
case)

2) From 2008 to current, what percentage of applications have been
rejected in the population of applications under EEA2

3) I note Chapter 5 of your European Casework Instructions provides
high level guidance on deciding EEA2 applications. However based on
the fact that 70% of applications are not decided in the required
SLA, I believe there is sufficient public interest in understanding
the actual process in working an EEA2 application. Therefore, I
would appreciate the process flow or operational manual that is
used by your European casework staff in managing an application
from receipt to disposition.

4) What internal or external checks are made on EEA2 applications.
Again, noting Chapter 5 of your European Casework Instructions, you
allude to high level requirements such as checking for validity of
marriage, execution of treaty rights and so forth. What systems, or
queries does the European casework team conduct in reviewing an EEA
2 application to decide accordingly?

5) You allude to recruitment of staff to respond to the backlog and
provide assurances by November 2009 that the UKBA will be working
in line to the obligations stipulated in legislation. What funding
has been allocated to support this hiring? Is this additional
funding that has been secured across multiple years or is this at
the expense of other departments.

Yours faithfully,

C Gillstrap

Dear Freedom Of Information Team ( IND ),

Ref: 18461

Being that 20 working days have passed since lodging this FOI
request, is it possible to get an update as to how much longer I
will need to wait for the information in this request?

Yours sincerely,

C Gillstrap

Dear Sir or Madam,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of
Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of UK Border Agency's
handling of my FOI request 'EEA2 Application Processes'. Whilst I
am grateful that some of the information has been released, as you
note in your response, there is sufficient public interest in
releasing the data that has been withheld. As the UKBA have been on
average violating the 6 month rule date for EEA2 applications, an
understanding of the process, checks and corresponding
justification for taking such a long time to process an application
is definitely in the public interest. Further, as only 1.4% of
applications have been rejected under this application process, I
can't see the UKBA's justification in thinking that there would be
substantive abuse of European application under this scheme.

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is
available on the Internet at this address:
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/ee...

I would appreciate a prompt acknowledgement of this request for an
internal review.

Yours faithfully,

C Gillstrap

Dear Freedom Of Information Team ( IND ),

Many thanks for your acknowledgement of my request. Indeed I am
referring to req # 12897, however any update on the internal review
on my previous request (12671) would be appreciated. I have already
escalated request 12671 to the ICO as no response has been
forthcoming from your agency.

Yours sincerely,

C Gillstrap

Dear Freedom Of Information Team ( IND ),

Many thanks for your request for clarification with regards to the
internal review for request 12897. I am specifically asking that
the decision for question 4
(What internal or external checks are made on EEA2 applications,
with reference to high level requirements mentioned in Chapter 5 of
the European Casework Instructions) is reviewed.

In this section, you claim exemption for providing this information
under section 31(1)(e) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000. I
believe the public interest test that was conducted was flawed and
even if correct, I believe some of the information could still be
released (either in redacted form or in summary form)

Yours sincerely,

C Gillstrap

Dear Freedom Of Information Team ( IND ),

I requested an internal review of this request and you acknowledged
this request on the 26th of November 2009. As it is now the 2nd of
February, can I have an update to why a response to the internal
review has not been provided?

Yours sincerely,

C Gillstrap