Making an asylum claim

This webpage provides some need to know information on making an asylum claim, through completing an Asylum application. Firstly it is important to be aware that asylum applications are, it appears on the basis of statistics (please the links at the end of ) regarding refusals, especially targeted by the Hostile Environment, and within the broader asylum-seeking population, some sub-population groups are particularly targeted.

Firstly, ALWAYS assume that your application is very likely to be approached by those in the UKVI / Home Office that receive an asylum application — and especially those Home Office UKVI caseworkers who review and make a decision on asylum applications and asylum application forms – in a ‘disbelief’ / ‘you are not genuine / you are making a fraudulent claim’ approach. 

In particular those assessing your application will state that they are assessing your application on a ‘balance of probabilities’ basis, but in fact assess it on the most-strict, disbelief of your claim basis. This discovery is only realised in refusal ‘decision & reasons’ documents details, provided by caseworkers.

As is well-known, through revelations in the public domain, detailed directly elsewhere through relevant hyperlinks on other pages of this website those assessing your application claim, are very likely to have poor experience and expertise in the particular, specialist knowledge areas that are absolutely required for making a professional and just assessment of your application (LGBT contexts being the most infamous of these experience & expertise requirements).

To maximise your chance of success with making an asylum claim, it is advised that you secure a qualified immigration advisor or immigration law firm/solicitor, specialising in immigration law and immigration from an asylum-seeking perspective.  It is essential though to seek only those immigration advisors and immigration law firms that have independently assessed, good records of providing good reliable services, from a genuine asylum seeker perspective. Please see also our Legal Representation page, too.

Below are some Asylum related pages information pages on the website:

Immigration Rules part 11: asylum Asylum (paragraphs 326A to 352H).

Immigration Rules part 11A: temporary protection Temporary protection

Immigration Rules part 11B Asylum

However, as seen from the ‘11B’ link above, within the online published information, there are subliminal riders built in on unstated points (highlights in Bold: other highlights on important points of communication where lack of clear definition, also provided) that the Home Office may utilise to turn down genuine as well as bogus asylum application claims:

  1. 357A. The Secretary of State shall inform asylum applicants in a language they may reasonably be supposed to understand and within a reasonable time after their claim for asylum has been recorded of the procedure to be followed, their rights and obligations during the procedure, and the possible consequences of non-compliance and non-co-operation. They shall be informed of the likely timeframe for consideration of the application and the means at their disposal for submitting all relevant information.

Asylum application interviews comprise an initial, case and supportive evidence receiving one, and a subsequent main detailed (often 2 hours+ duration) interview, are the key elements in making an appeal claim application. 

These interviews give opportunities for multiple ways of refusing a genuine application.  These, ranging from unlooked for calls through from very senior UKVI officers to give instruction to caseworkers conducting interviews to put non-founded/non-evidence based ‘black mark’ details on the applicants, caseworker completed interview details form.  And for the caseworker to directly follow unstated guidance from within the UKVI at operational, Hostile Environment directing level, that ensure key details supporting the application, and related supportive evidence, are ignored.  This enabling the claim to be refused, and then passed back to genuine applicants to have to then make an appeal against the decision, to the Immigration Tribunal.