Points Based System-Maintenance Funds and Pankina

A recent decision by the Upper Tribunal confirmed two points relevant to Points Based applicants.  First, that it is not essential that maintenance funds be in a bank account in the name of the applicant; and second, that the effect of the decision in Pankina isn’t limited to the “three month rule” with regards to the evidence of maintenance funds.

Maintenance Funds in Husband’s Bank Account

The facts of the case were quite simple.  The applicant applied to extend her Tier 4 (General) Student Migrant visa under the Points-Based System.  She was refused on the basis that the funds were not in a bank account in her name.  The funds were in fact, in a bank account in the name of her dependant husband.  However, she also provided ample evidence that she had access to the funds, including a statement from her husband that she had access to the funds, a statement from her university that the fees had previously been paid for by her husband, and bank statements showing payments to the University.  The Upper Tribunal held that this was sufficient to meet the requirements of Immigration Rules that “the funds … are accessible to the applicant and the applicant provides the specified documents and proof to show this”.

Effect of the Decision in Pankina

The Home Office argued that the applicant could not rely on her husband’s bank statements because the Policy Guidance did not permit a student to use the bank statement of his/her spouse.  This argument was rejected by the Upper Tribunal which reaffirmed the decision in Pankina: “A policy is precisely not a rule: it is required by law to be implemented without stringency and to be used and adjusted in…fairness and good sense”.

In summary, this decision reaffirms that the Policy Guidance does not have the status of Immigration Rules; and there is no reason why an applicant cannot establish that funds are accessible to the applicant when held in the bank account in the name of the applicant’s spouse.