Working it out

When the Home Office announced without warning that it was shelving its fast-track system for dealing with work-permit applications for foreign business people, leading immigration lawyers feared a return to the bad old days of people queueing in sleeping bags outside the immigration department's Lunar House in Croydon.But, after a concerted campaign by the Immigration Law Practitioners Association (ILPA), the lawyers say the Home Office has backed down and promised to consult over proposals for an alternative system.The problem arose when the Home Office wrote to law firms saying that existing rules allowing them to apply to the public caller unit by post for up to six permit applications per week - dealt with in an alloted time slot in a 24-hour turnaround system - were to be shelved because of a lack of resources.

Instead, firms would be allowed only one postal application per week, with additional applications having to be made by the applicant in person at Lunar House.Julia Onslow-Cole, head of business immigration at City firm CMS Cameron McKenna, is co-convenor of ILPA's employment and business sub-committee.

She and other members of ILPA will be meeting Home Office officials next week to discuss the alternative proposals, which she hopes will enhance the system.She explains: 'The current proposal is to replace the existing system with one whereby firms will have one postal slot a week and, for other applications, they will be able to submit certified copies of passports.

Once each application has been considered, arrangements can then be made for passports to be endorsed immediately.'I think the Home Office realised it had to be sensible about this potentially ridiculous situation and the effect the change would have had on the business community.

The Gazette was very helpful in reporting the problem and I think seeing it in the press highlighted how contrary it was to the government line of attracting foreign investment into the UK.'By the time we met officials, they were quite clearly genuinely looking at alternative ways of sorting things out.

It could lead to a wider range of applications being dealt with under the new system, which will be a significant change.'In the meantime, she says the Home Office has promised applications over and above the one slot now guaranteed under the new system will be looked at 'sympathetically'.

In practice, this has meant applications being dealt with as before.

She adds: 'The Home Office has been very co-operative and has said it wants the new system running by the middle of October.'The Home Office's stance has also led to London firm Magrath & Co adjourning its application for leave to apply for judicial review against the Home Office.Partner Ben Sheldrick says: 'We haven't withdrawn the application as we are waiting to see what the final proposals are.

We had a legitimate expectation that the Home Office would consult on any changes to the arrangements rather than just pull the rug from under everyone's feet.'We have four slots and it would have been extremely disadvantageous for our clients if we could no longer rely on an expedited system.

Applications through the normal postal system are taking up to six months and it is simply not possible for clients to be without their passports for that long - clients are distressed enough if we suggest they be without them for a week.'He says the Home Office position was that it did not have the resources to expand the number of slots without taking some away from some firms, so it thought it fairer to give one slot to a greater number of people.'But that wouldn't be fair to firms representing large numbers of business people when some other firms wanting slots only used them very occasionally.'There are about 200 law firms, companies and other agencies allocated slots.

Under the old system, 50 had more than one slot, resulting in between 250 and 300 applications to the public caller unit a week.A Home Office spokesman says pressure on the unit has gone up 'enormously', with increasing demand from firms using the fast-track procedures as well as from applicants in person.

'It is a matter of prioritising and spreading the workload through the system as it stands.

What we have said is we are happy to discuss what else we can offer in cases where there are compelling and compassionate grounds.'Philip Trott, head of immigration at London firm Bates Wells & Braithwaite and co-convenor with Ms Onslow-Cole, says the Home Office has realised it should not have acted so peremptorily.

He hopes it will come up with something sensible: 'You don't take on lawyers and take away their slots without feathers being ruffled.'This issue isn't just about fat-cat businessmen and women being given preferential treatment - a variety of people need to use the fast-track procedures, such as a working holidaymaker who marries a British person and wants to stay.

We also do lots of work permit extensions for foreign lawyers employed by firms here.'Reducing the slots to just one per firm would have meant people having to go into the immigration black hole at Lunar House.

You can send an application by recorded delivery, wait at least a month for an acknowledgement, which warns it could take up to six months for a decision, maybe more, while no one is allowed to speak to you about the case.

The 24-hour system was predictable and absolutely fantastic.'For Hilary Belchak, partner and head of the immigration department at Kingsley Napley, the Home Office letter came as a nasty shock.

It arrived six days after it was typed, by second-class recorded delivery, giving her just ten days' notice of the change.Ms Belchak, who is a former secretary of ILPA and a member of the business and employment sub-committee, explains: 'We had one client who wrote immediately to the Home Office but our other clients trusted us to get this sorted out.

We have slots booked up until November and so far everything is being dealt with as before.'When we met Home Office officials they explained their problems with lack of resources and the overwhelming number of cases the public caller unit had to deal with, which have escalated beyond expectations.'She says that at the meeting, the ILPA made it clear they were not arguing that executives were more entitled or more deserving of special treatment.'However, the commercial needs of this country make it impossible for businesses to operate sensibly if their staff cannot travel - it is not about who you are but how urgent are your needs.

The fast-track is also used by students and for marriage applications.'We don't abuse the system and we will always see if there isn't some other route we can use.

Also, while the allocation of slots needs to be even-handed, some firms don't have such a huge demand.

We have ten fee-earners in the immigration team, so we are bound to have a greater need than someone handling the occasional application.'In the past, there has been an element of us and them with the Home Office but now I think they may be more sympathetic to the fact that practitioners can make things easier for them.'Ms Onslow-Cole agrees: 'Although things are still up in the air, the whole thing has been quite good because it has opened a dialogue with the Home Office, which has to be the right way to resolve problems.'Grania Langdon-Down is a freelance journalist