Scroll down the page - the latest news is at the top
We generally update this page to make clients aware of problems or issues that will impact on them, plus the occasional boast or moan.
December 3rd 2024: UK Visa Decision-Making Centre in Sheffield seems to have been issuing way too many residence permits to people that don't qualify for them.
I'm not going to claim to be an investigator of any kind but this issue has become more and more obvious to us over the years and a pattern has emerged. Bear in mind we're usually dealing with acts from overseas coming here for just a few days, and only a few of them need visas due to their nationality, so I don't see many visas.
Increasingly we've been hearing that the length of stay granted to visa applicants has been way beyond what it should be, and when you speak to a sponsor who deals with a lot of visa nationals it's obviously a big problem. Sometimes UKVI is issuing a short visa to musicians etc., but then sending them emails saying "collect your biometric residence permit (BRP) from the Post Office at (address) when you get to the UK". BRPs should only be generated if a person is working in the UK for MORE than 6 months, which the vast majority of these people are not.
If the person does as instructed they collect a card which often says they can live here for way longer than the CoS or the initial visa....so these are serious case-working errors. Previously we'd seen a few where the person was granted a year, even if they were only doing a one-off gig. I'd see maybe one or two of these per year, and it could be put down to random errors (if I dealt with more visa nationals I'd have seen the pattern much sooner). That's bad enough, but recently there seems to have been a spike in cases where the person is granted up to 2 years (considering the maximum in this category is 12 months!). This is confusing to the overseas nationals and their sponsors, it theoretically allows the person to work and live here way longer than they should (breaking all sorts of UKVI and sponsor guidelines), and it creates a serious issue for the sponsors concerned (if they don't report it and try to get it revoked they can't possibly meet their sponsor duties because they only issued the CoS for a specific show, not a 2-year period; and even if they report it they may have problems getting the BRP off the holder). Lately, more and more visa holders (who don't possess a BRP) have been emailed to say their BRP is expiring on 31 December 2024 so they have to do some other palaver (they don't!). Perhaps there are hundreds (thousands?) of un-collected BRPs sitting in Post Offices around the UK, waiting for people who don't know they've been issued.
A sponsor I spoke to recently, who deals mostly with acts from South-East Asia (hence they almost all need visas, where only a tiny fraction of our clients do) says he's totally sick of it. He'll issue 50 CoS to a big Bollywood act doing a couple of shows here, and find out later that a dozen or more of the personnel (totally at random) have been granted BRPs they're not entitled to. He bags them up and posts them back to UKVI with an explanation, but it keeps on happening. Where one gets through the net the musician might reasonably say "Hey, this says I can work here for 2 years - why did you say my work permit was for 2 weeks?"
This shows some caseworkers at Sheffield don't check the CoS dates, and some don't even know that 12 months is the absolute ceiling on any visa in this category. That is worrying enough, but where are the checks and balances? Why are supervisors not picking up on this? How long a person can work here is a big deal - some people pay thousands of £ to live here - and some caseworkers are giving it away to people who didn't even ask for it!
Granting people residence permits to which they're not entitled leads to illegal working, confusion as to legality of the status, and to sponsors being inconvenienced or worse (what if the person collects a 2-year BRP unknown to the sponsor, then stays way past what the sponsor organised?). I have raised a complaint about this to the Home Office today. Several of my clients have been granted WAY longer than they should have been, and it seems to show there is not enough checking at the Sheffield office. It's bad enough when a visa gets refused because the officer doesn't understand how a band is paid for live shows, but when they grant a 2-year visa for someone doing 1 gig, it's actually worse!
December 3rd 2024: ETAs: an extra hurdle when coming to the UK.
Many non-EU nationals will need an electronic travel authorisation (ETA) if arriving in the UK as of Jan 8th 2025. This includes the USA, Canada, Australia, NZ, Japan and many more (weblink below tells you full list plus what to do, how to get it, and so on). It costs £10 and lasts 2 years unless you renew your passport sooner (it's linked to the passport details). These are, basically, a security check not connected with the purpose of the travel....they're needed for tourists, temporary CoS holders, etc.
The system for applying for these went online only a few days ago (giving people a max of 6 weeks before they become mandatory; not ideal) - but we've heard from one client who received his pretty much instantly and it was very clear and simple, so that's encouraging. As with all these things, scam websites have popped up looking for you to use them instead.....just go straight to the gov.uk page.
Initially EU/EEA passport holders don't need them, but they will do as of April 2025. UK, Irish and residents of UK and Ireland won't need them.
UK gov weblink here:
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/apply-for-an-electronic-travel-authorisation-eta#who-can-apply
August 8th 2024
PPE entrants cannot use the e-gates! Stop mis-advising bands (yes, I'm looking at you UKVI, Home Office and even some of the big law firms).
I'm saying this for the umpteenth time, because so many border officers, at least 2 UKVI webpages, and even UK law firms, are perpetuating the myth that entertainers coming to the UK to do shows as Permitted Paid Engagements are able to use the e-gates, hence can avoid seeing an officer. Here's why that's wrong advice: the actual immigration rules (Appendix V paragraph 13) say that the passengers must meet these criteria:
- V 13.1. Where the applicant is seeking to come to the UK to undertake a permitted paid engagement, they must be aged 18 or over when they enter the UK.
- V 13.2. The applicant must intend to do one (or more) of the permitted paid engagements set out in V 13.3. which must be:
- (a) arranged before the applicant travels to the UK; and
- (b) declared as part of the application for entry clearance or permission to enter the UK; and
- (c) evidenced by a formal invitation, as required by V 13.3; and
- (d) relate to the applicant’s area of expertise and occupation overseas.
August 1st 2024
Statistics were provided by UK Visas and Immigration today on the number of Certificates of Sponsorship issued within the temporary Creative Worker category. This was in reply to our FoI request. They show a general slow upward trend in CoS numbers which was only interrupted by Covid, but then rose rapidly after Brexit kicked in. The 2 most recent years (2022 and 2023) show figures of approx 53,000 and 55,000 respectively, whilst in 2019 (pre-Brexit) 45,000 were issued. The vast bulk of these will be issued to bands and their crews, with smaller portions for theatre, film and TV, comedy etc.
This would seem to make entertainment the second-highest sector by volume of CoS used, after health and social care.
If we factor in Permitted Paid Engagements (an immigration route used by some entertainers and for which UKVI will not have any statistics, but my estimate would be perhaps 10,000 per year) and permit-free festivals (events that get an exemption from needing CoS or PPE paperwork) at perhaps another 3-5,000 per year, that makes around 68 or 70 thousand work entries by entertainers, their crews, film and stage actors, some film production staff, comedians and so on. This is not a small sector in terms of work movements into the UK, and that reinforces my call that UKVI needs to meet with the sector, the same way they meet with other sectors, and that airport staff and Border Force officers need to be trained properly in how to deal with them.
May 18th 2024 - this week UK Visas and Immigration (UKVI) made significant changes to the rules and guidance for Creative Workers (with no consultation and no notice, naturally).
Regrettably UKVI have moved the goalposts again with no notice and no discussion. On Thursday this week (May 16 2024) sponsors were greeted with news that their guidance and rules had been altered quite radically, and that they needed to change their processes immediately. Once again I find this approach unreasonable; UKVI never engage, never discuss, never warn. Since they disbanded the Arts and Entertainment Taskforce there has been literally zero engagement with the creative sector, which remains one of their biggest stakeholders, issuing tens of thousands of CoS each year and adding immensely to the cultural and financial wellbeing of the UK.
Those changes in a nutshell:
1) They seem to have ditched the concept that the creative workers (bands, DJs, actors etc.) must be shown as no threat to the resident workforce. This has gone, in favour of the sponsor showing how their overseas acts will make a "unique contribution to creative life in the UK" (in their new guidance the word 'creative' seems to be interchangeable with 'cultural'). This is a big change; the whole 'protecting resident labour' concept has underpinned the work permit and CoS systems since at least as early as I can remember (and I go back to around 1990 when I worked on the team deciding who gets a work permit and who gets refused). That has been fundamentally shifted to a new emphasis on benefitting the UK's creative/cultural life. I'm not saying I disagree with it, I'm just saying they should have warned us about this and at least given us a few weeks so all the sponsors knew they needed to start using different wording on their CoS.
2) There is a new requirement to be more specific about expenses and allowances provided to creative workers and whether those expenses will be recouped by the sponsor. In practice this will really only impact those applying for visas (the minority) but it's somewhat troubling in that specifics can't always be given. A sponsor can say "flights and accommodation will be provided", which is entirely relevant and substantive information, but can't always be specific (in advance of those things being paid for) about the total cost of those things. Again it's a pity UKVI did not discuss this with the sector.
3) They have decided that, in the case of a "lead applicant group", if the lead applicant is refused then all the other group members will also be refused. Again, this only really applies to visa nationals. What's a lead applicant group? It's usually a musical act where the lead person is the name of the act (and bearing in mind this only impacts visa nationals I'll give you 2 examples: A.R. Rahman from India and Bilal Khan from Pakistan would be lead applicant groups. From the Western pop world you would normally treat Beyonce, Drake and Bruce Springsteen as 'lead applicant groups', with some caveats that are too boring to outline here). A sponsor would usually input their CoS as a lead applicant group, where the lead star is absolutely vital to the show(s) going ahead. Presumably the UKVI has encountered situations where a lead applicant has been refused a visa but backing musicians and crew have been granted visas, which they then used for something else because the original show would have been cancelled. Fair enough. In practice I don't see how this can be achieved though, because (and this is one of the most annoying things about visas) even if a group all applies at the same time, their applications are randomly scattered amongst the UKVI's caseworkers. A group of 10 is usually dealt with as 10 individual cases, by 10 different caseworkers. How they'll figure out who has the lead applicant, and wait for them to be approved before approving the rest, is a mystery.
A client of ours was recently contacted by a UKVI visa caseworker about an African musician whose band was meant to play in the UK in Spring 2023; did the sponsor still want the musician to come here? My client's reply was basically "No, the show was in March 2023 and was cancelled - the whole band are doing other things, why would we randomly want 1 member of the band to come here now? The CoS has long expired anyway." No reply from UKVI about why the offer was even made. Some visa officers work in mysterious ways.
I am calling for a sector meeting with the UKVI (and maybe DCMS), and reinstatement of the taskforce or similar forum which meets at least once a year to try and stop these sudden surprise lurches in policy, and address the very real problems sponsors have with the current system.
Many UK border officers seem confused about PPE (permitted paid engagements) May 2024
Bearing in mind PPE is one of the 2 main routes open to entertainers coming to the UK for short-term work like a tour, the entertainment sector is impacted by any alteration to the rules. Nevertheless, the rules were tinkered with on Feb 1, pretty much out of the blue. PPE, instead of being a standalone status granted for 30 days, was now to be rolled into "standard visitor" with the caveat that the permitted engagement(s) had to be within the first month of the 6 months maximum stay granted. The Home Secretary made a somewhat misleading statement about this to Parliament in January. The misleading part was that he indicated this would mean more people could use the electronic gates on arrival.
Why do I say this is misleading? Because it doesn't fit with the immigration rules!
Those rules say (in Appendix V for Visitors, paragraph 13):
1) The intention to perform paid engagements "must be declared" on entry or when applying for a visa. For a non-visa national they must, therefore, declare their intention verbally to a Border Force officer, because it's impossible to declare anything to an e-gate. Ergo they must queue and see a human officer, not use an e-gate.
2) The intention to perform a PPE must also "be evidenced" by paperwork to back up the passenger's claim that they qualify for entry to do a permitted paid engagement (not everyone de-facto gets this permission; you must show you qualify for it and an officer must agree). The passenger needs an invitation from a relevant UK organisation and evidence they are a full-time professional at what they're doing whilst here. You cannot evidence anything to an e-gate; so you'd have to show that evidence to an officer and have it assessed.
To me, these things mean people coming here for permitted paid engagements definitely cannot use the e-gates. And by association, anyone using the e-gates cannot legally perform paid engagements under the provisions for PPE. We have already heard at least 3 acts holding PPE paperwork were told "you don't need stamps or letters" - just go through the e-gates. In effect this is ensuring they can't work legally, which is a perverse situation; it's bad enough with airport staff directing CoS holders through the e-gates, without PPE holders being added to the problem.
PPE Visas now utterly baffling because they say "work prohibited":
On a related matter, I note that UK visas issued to musicians doing permitted paid engagements no longer say so; they now just say "visitor - work and recourse to public funds prohibited". That is very misleading; for the applicant, for any UK organisation they plan to perform an engagement for, and for any UK Border Force officer looking at their visa. How does anyone know they're permitted to do paid engagements if the visa says "no work"??? This is, frankly, a mess. It should be simple to make a slight variation of the standard visitor stamp to signify an applicant who has declared intent to do PPE and proved it sufficiently in their visa application. Disappointing, to put it mildly. It's been many years (pre-Covid) since the entertainment sector had a meaningful policy and implementation meeting with the Home Office....changing the rules without consulting the sector leads to these basic errors being made.
New error message on the SMS (the portal where Certificates of Sponsorship are processed by sponsors):
And a random new error screen has started appearing occasionally when sponsors are booted out of the SMS and try to log back in. We've had this appear on 2 separate computers using separate logins. This page, vastly different from the usual "There is a problem with this page" one, shows a whole screen of complex error coding and responses from their server. Within this coding I can see that Fujitsu (of Post Office Horizon fame) is the UKVI's IT provider, and that they still call the UKVI the BIA (a name the Home Office ditched around 15 years ago). Quite bizarre. I pointed this out to the UKVI because I'm not sure all this code should be visible to the public, and they said it was a problem with my settings(!). OK, a whole page of your server codes is shown and it's my settings that are at fault? That seems fine.
The SMS (Sponsor Management System) will be down all day Thursday 4 April.
In a change to the planned maintenance / update happening to the SMS (announced last week as taking place on Weds 3 April) the UKVI announced today at noon that it will in fact push the work back by a day, so it'll be down from Wednesday night to Friday morning. This means no CoS can be issued on Thursday 4 April 2024.
March 25th 2024 - the SMS will be down all day next Wednesday (3rd April) so no-one will be able to issue CoS. In fact UKVI says it'll be down from 7PM on Tuesday the 2nd, to 9AM on Thursday the 4th. Not exactly helpful during what is already a short week because of Easter bank holiday.
Jan 2024 - Sponsor licence renewal scrapped, hiccups with the SMS, and some loosening of the rules on PPE
As of April 6th 2024 UKVI (UK Visas and Immigration) will not make registered sponsors pay to renew their licence every 4 years. This is good news as it will save sponsors money (the licence for Creative Worker category currently costs £536 to renew).
Hiccups with the SMS: apart from the usual (SMS randomly boots out users; especially bad around lunchtime we find) some sponsors have noticed an incorrect error message come up saying they can't issue a CoS because they don't have enough allocation. I've seen an error message saying a sponsor couldn't issue CoS for a duo, but they had over 200 in their allocation. I'm going to say this is (hopefully) a temporary error due to some sort of update done on the software or server. I will report it to UKVI and see what happens...fingers crossed.
Artists who use the Permitted Paid Engagemnts (PPE) route to get into the UK look like they will be advantaged as of the end of Jan 2024. The govt has announced (although not given much specific detail) that PPE Visitors will be able t stay 6 months (instead of 1) but must declare their intentions on arrival (hence can't use the e-gate, can't arrive via Ireland without a visa). This announcement was made by James Cleverly in the House of Commons, and he confusingly said it would help speed them through the border and increase use of electronic gates. That can't be true because you cannot 'declare your intention' to an electronic gate - it cannot be communicated with. We'll see how this pans out.
SEPTEMBER 15TH 2023 - U.K. VISA/CoS COSTS TO RISE BY 15% & SOME BORDER OFFICERS STILL THINK BREXIT HASN'T HAPPENED.
Today the Home Office announced changes to many of its visa fees. In the Creative Worker sector the cost of a CoS (issued by the sponsor) will rise from £21 to £25. For visa nationals, and those non-visa nationals working here for over 3 months, the Creative Worker visa cost will rise from £259 to £298. These changes will come into effect at 9AM on October 4, 2023. So that's just 12 working days' notice, which isn't ideal. Also rising by 15% will be visit visas, from £100 to £115, which includes PPE (permitted paid engagement) visas.
On the second matter, we're still hearing some instances where border officers are refusing to stamp the passports of EU CoS holders - one band came through yesterday; the US members were stamped but the EU ones were told "the EU laws still apply for the remainder of the year". I mean, what can you say about this level of ignorance? The rules changed in December 2020; that's the best part of 3 years ago! Any sponsor who encounters this should complain and ask for remote variance of leave. If you don't you're not meeting your sponsor duties (missing stamps = UKVI assume they worked illegally).
This is in addition to the still-common cases where bands and crews are being directed to the E-gates by airport employees almost under the noses of border officers. Some musicians notice the error and try to go back - only to be told it's impossible, the terminal's too busy - get your luggage and move on.
April 13th 2023: NATIONAL MINIMUM WAGE - STATEMENT MUST BE MADE ON CoS:
New guidance was issued to border officers and visa caseworkers yesterday (12 April) which makes everyone assume national minimum wage (NMW) applies across the board to all CoS holders. This is extremely annoying because, as we know, almost all touring entertainers and their crew personnel are NOT employed by a UK company - they are self-employed service providers, hence NMW does not apply. Contracts for live shows do not book bands based on employment law, they are service provision agreements. UKVI should know this and should reflect it in their guidelines; on this occasion they have fallen well short of that.
So, where a band is on tour, we recommend the sponsor states on the CoS that the band personnel are exempt from NMW because they are self-employed and/or they're contract service providers. If you forget to state this on the CoS you should make a sponsor note to that effect. As of now, the UKVI's guidance actively encourages their staff and colleagues at Border Force to check that the CoS holder is paid at least NMW, and deem the CoS invalid if it doesn't either state a salary above NMW or explain why NMW does not apply.
I have written to UKVI to recommend they change their guidance to reflect the fact NMW hardly ever applies to touring bands (at the moment it assumes it applies to everyone). I've also asked for a meeting between the live music sector and UKVI to discuss this and the other changes they've made to the rules without any consultation. UPDATE - they replied to say it wasn't worth a meeting and that a phone call would have to suffice. During the phone call the UKVI manager refuted all my concerns, saying they were "not an issue". Basically he said everyone everywhere must be paid national minimum wage and my argument would lead to people being paid less. I said "I'm not arguing about the level of pay - I want everyone to earn NMW - what I can't do is tell you how much a pop star is paying his lighting tech or backing singer, because it's not written on the contract and it's none of my business. Also, if a band makes a loss on a tour are you saying that's somehow illegal?". He didn't understand...was not willing to budge at all and said unless I could specifically name several acts who'd been refused entry based on NMW issues I was making a mountain out of a molehill. Naturally I did not have names to give him so he made a sweeping generalisation that it wasn't a problem. It seems to be official policy not to consult with this sector about rule changes and to sweep aside concerns made about those changes. Let the record state that I tried to flag these issues (overseas bands being banned from earning cash if issued CoS, sponsors having to state that everyone on a CoS is paid above NMW even if the band isn't making a profit or the sponsor hasn't a clue how much the entourage are paid, and so on). So if these ever come up in a sponsor audit as a reason for punishing a sponsor, or a visa is refused because the sponsor didn't state how much a band or crew member was earning, my point will be vindicated and theirs will be refuted. I know some visas for African artists have been refused over CoS not stating their individual earnings, but wasn't involved in those cases so could not name the individuals. I've been in this business 32 years....I know when a rule change should be unenforceable for obvious legal reasons. There are at least 2 I have mentioned here; I believe sponsors should be working together to get them changed before visas are refused and sponsors punished.
Examples of misleading guidance include paragraphs CRW3.2 and CRW3.4 of the sponsor guidance for Creative Workers. These both lead the reader to assume that NMW must be adhered to at all times and by all sponsors, and that a sponsor must state the earnings of the CoS holder on the CoS. UKVI has known and acknowledged in writing since at least 2009 that sponsors of bands on tour CANNOT state what each person earns because it is unreasonable and intrusive, so these errors in their current guidance could lead to visas being refused or sponsors being punished unfairly. This is specifically mentioned in CRW para 5.22 where it says the sponsor of a band getting a group fee can put £0.01 per contract on the CoS. Nobody cares about these conflicting statements until it affects them.
April 5th 2023. AS THE HOME OFFICE/U.K.V.I. HAS STARTED GETTING FIXATED WITH OVERSEAS WORKER EARNINGS AGAIN, WE RECOMMEND STATING ON THE CoS WHETHER OR NOT THE NATIONAL MINIMUM WAGE APPLIES TO THE CoS HOLDER - GIVING AN EXPLANATION
Since about 2016 the UKVI has occasionally had the bright idea that in order to protect workers, CoS holders can't be paid under the national minimum wage (NMW). All perfectly noble and well-intentioned....except where the sponsor is not responsible for how much the CoS holder earns. For instance, where a band is doing a self-funded tour and only getting £200 per show (how does the sponsor know how they will divide that? how does the sponsor know the band's costs won't be more than £200? How do they know whether the band has received funding from 3rd parties such as record label or sponsors? how about where the payment is going through a band's agent in New York or Paris?). Basically, UKVI should engage caution when refusing visas or chastising sponsors about NMW. NMW does not, for instance, apply to self-employed people. Almost all band and crew personnel are self-employed, therefore the assumption, for touring bands at least, should be that NMW does NOT apply, rather than that it DOES apply. There are two statements in the updated guidance for sponsors of Creative Workers, which kind of cross-cut each other
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1116088/Sponsor-a-Creative-Worker-11-22.pdf
On page 23, para CRW 5.13 says "you also guarantee that you will ensure the worker is paid in accordance with the UK national minimum wage". Taken in isolation (as visa officers are inclined to do) this is very cut-and-dried; you must ensure a keyboard technician, dancer or roadie is paid NMW....never mind the fact you don't pay them, don't know how much they're paid or whatever. It's like if a plumber comes to install a new radiator in your house...you're not legally obliged to demand from them how much they pay their assistant who's lugging the radiator into the house, or send them away if the plumber won't tell you.
HOWEVER, as with many legal matters, the devil (or in this case the salvation) is in the detail. Paragraph CRW5.14 on the next page of the guidance says "if the worker will not be paid the NMW because they are exempt from this requirement you must provide an explanation of this in the "allowances" free-text box.
So, even though most of the bands and road crews you issue CoS for will be earning WAY above the NMW, because you're not obliged to find out how much they're paid or who by, you can state the "group fee" answer as always, but we recommend you add this line into the allowances box:
"We do not know or set the pay rate for the holder. The NMW does not apply to the holder because they are self-employed and/or paid by a non-UK entity".
This only applies to groups where there is no code of practice - so it applies to music acts, but not to theatre acts.
As a wider point I wish the UKVI would engage with the sector before inserting these kinds of statements....paragraph CRW5.13 is leading visa officers to believe there are no exceptions, because they take that line in isolation. I would urge UKVI to alter para CRW5.13 to accurately reflect the fact that the VAST majority of Creative Worker CoS are issued to self-employed people who live overseas, are paid overseas, and are not employees of the sponsor, hence the NMW rules do not apply to them.
THE OLD PROBLEM OF CoS HOLDERS BEING MISDIRECTED TO THE ELECTRONIC GATES IS STILL A BIG ISSUE:
Ever since the expansion of the UK airport E-gates (from a select few registered travellers up to 2018, to millions of people from the EU, US, Canada, Japan, Australia etc after 2018) CoS holders have encountered problems. These stem primarily from bad staff training of the people who direct passengers in the arrivals halls. These staff are mostly contracted by 3rd parties on behalf of the airport; we have complained to the contracting "employers" (in fact most are deemed self-employed contractors to minimise tax) multiple times about the situation, yet nothing seems to improve. The scene is usually this: worker or band gets off a long-haul flight along with tourists, returning residents etc., is filed along corridors to the arrivals hall, and then untrained staff are told to filter those people into queues based solely on their nationality....the CoS holder usually goes along with this and is then at an electronic barrier where they have to hold their passport down on the glass and look into a camera....they're then through and can proceed to collect their luggage. They have not seen a border officer, not had their CoS checked - they are landed as a visitor with no right to work or earn money. There is no stamp in the passport either.
This is not how CoS are used - you MUST queue to see a human border officer and get your passport stamped. There are signs in the arrivals hall which confirm that, but still the queue-wranglers misdirect people. It happens almost every day, and sometimes it happens to dozens of CoS holders on the same day; it's a widespread problem which has been ongoing for 4 years without improvement. Every day we hear "I showed them my document and told them I was working but they didn't care".....that's what happens when the airports hire people with one sole aim: get the queues moving quicker and don't ask any questions. What should happen is that airport staff and UK Border Force work together as a team, to handle passengers correctly. All too often that doesn't happen, and the airport staff have misdirected CoS holders before they can be processed the right way.
We have a way to rectify this if it gets reported quickly enough...if you do nothing then, technically, your CoS holder does not have the right to work.
19th August 2022 - Sponsor Management System due to be down for maintenance this weekend. Not known if Border Force's "CoS checker also unavailable.......
The system for issuing CoS will be down for maintenance this weekend, UKVI has warned. In a statement given to sponsors who logged into their accounts after 15th August, it said:
'FOR THE ATTENTION OF ALL SPONSORS: Sponsor Management System (SMS) and Sponsor Application will be unavailable from 19:00 Friday 19th August until 9:00 on Monday 22nd August while we carry out an essential upgrade to sponsorship IT systems. This means that you will not have access to your SMS account or the online Sponsor Application form during these times. Please accept our apologies for any inconvenience this causes.'
It's not known if this will prevent border officers from being able to check and validate CoS - hopefully not. There is supposed to be a contingency plan in place for such planned outages (UKVI is supposed to send ports a list of "live" CoS) but it's not known if this always actually happens. In the meantime, many sponsors won't even know about the outage, because they might not have logged into their accounts since Monday (when the announcement appeared). This would block any CoS from being issued this weekend.
Even if the worst happens (the system won't let officers check CoS and there has been no list sent by UKVI to the ports) officers should use their discretion to err in favour of the sponsor, and perhaps then verify and activate the CoS on Monday when the system's back up. If a band, film producer or DJ, for example, has a printed CoS which clearly originates from a licensed sponsor and is in the correct format (starting C5C, having 11 characters, with capital letters at the 1st, 3rd, 5th and 11th positions, the rest being numbers) then it's clear the CoS should be honoured - if the sponsor has not stated the work dates on the CoS printout (we always DO) then maybe a call to the sponsor might be necessary. Obviously a system so totally reliant on tech cannot be allowed to prevent acts from performing concerts etc. just because of scheduled maintenance.
9 May 2022 - Many didn't notice, but the rules on passengers with prison sentences being denied entry to the UK changed significantly during Covid - now anyone sentenced to more than 12 months "must be refused"
Whilst I'm sure it wasn't intentional, the UK government slipped a rule-change through while the live entertainment sector was dormant due to Covid shutdowns. On December 1st 2020 the rules on border refusals due to criminal records became much, much harsher. I previously alluded to earlier changes, but this one was a real biggie.
As of December 1st 2020 paragraph 9.4.1 of the Immigration Rules states that a passenger arriving at UK border control "must be refused" if they have in their past an (adult) jail sentence exceeding 12 months, or was deemed a "persistent offender who shows particular disregard for the law, or had committed a criminal offence which caused serious harm.
Up until that point the jail sentence cut-off point for UK bans was 4 years; now it's 1 year. This brings a LOT more people into the category of being inadmissible to the UK by the letter of the law, and it's likely to impact certain music genres more than others.
If an artist has received a jail sentence of less than 12 months it results in mandatory refusal of entry unless at least 12 months has passed since the end of the sentence (and refusal of entry can still be discretionary after that). This is referenced in paragraph 9.4.4
If you're a promoter or agent trying to bring in an overseas act and you know they have a high-profile criminal record; seek legal counsel. The rules on refusing entry to the UK based on criminal records are linked here (UK gov webpage; note that this document lists the rules before 1 Dec 2020, and then the rules after that date - page 13 is the most pertinent one for our purposes).
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1032285/Criminality.pdf
April 8th 2022 - the SMS (CoS system) will be down for upgrade over the weekend, starting tonight at 7PM and ending (we hope) by 9AM on Monday morning (April 11, 2022). This not only means you can't issue CoS this weekend, even in an emergency, but it may mean that border officers will get a "computer says no" when they try to validate CoS details for overseas artists arriving this weekend. UKVI is supposed to send the ports a list of all live CoS just before the weekend - who knows if they actually do?
Feb 15th 2022 - E.U. nationals CoS fee waiver to end, what to do about truck drivers on tour, and ongoing problems with CoS holders being ushered through E-gates
Hi folks - it's been a few months since we gave an update on things. We just wanted to let you know that CoS for EU nationals, most of which have been free of charge since Brexit, are to be chargeable as of 26 Feb 2022. So that Italian band whose CoS were free last year - no longer. If you have your own licence the cost of the CoS will be the same as you'd pay for a US, Japanese or any other act; £21 if you do them all in one go.
MUSIC/THEATRE TOUR TRUCK DRIVERS.
Since Brexit, and now that touring is picking up again (touch wood) we're getting quite a few enquiries from promoters and agents about issuing CoS to EU truck drivers on tour. CoS are not appropriate here - truck drivers working for overseas companies/clients, delivering goods to the UK and taking them away again, can enter as visitors. There is a specific section in the visitor rules saying this (mind you, you need to be an expert to find it!). It says the following
Overseas roles requiring specific activities in the UK
- PA 9.1. Individuals employed outside the UK may visit the UK to take part in the following activities in relation to their employment overseas:...........
- PA 9.2. Drivers on a genuine international route between the UK and a country outside the UK may:
2. (b) undertake cabotage operations.
PA 9.3. Drivers under PA 9.2. must be employed or contracted to an operator registered in a country outside the UK or be a self-employed operator and driver based outside the UK and the operator must hold an International Operators Licence or be operating on an own account basis.
So, we advise that you do not issue CoS to truck drivers as part of a tour crew coming to the UK.
In other news....well, the E-gates are still the main problem for entertainment sponsors. Acts holding CoS are herded towards them far too often, even when they're showing their CoS and declaring they're here to WORK. And we're still hearing some airport staff who don't seem to have heard of a thing called Brexit - we're still hearing (mainly to EU national CoS holders, but even some Americans) "no, we don't stamp your passport anymore - go through", which is (to be blunt) totally incompetent. So far we've heard this from multiple airports and sea ports. It's persisted since before Brexit, but got even worse since. Sponsors need to make REALLY CLEAR to their CoS holders that they CANNOT use the E-gates, and cannot simply be waved through without a stamp in their passport. Even then, they don't always achieve that. If your artist was incorrectly handled when trying to use a CoS on arrival in the UK there is a way around it, but you need to know what you're doing. Speak to us - we'll keep you right.
November 1st 2021:
Serious new UKVI system glitch is hamstringing some sponsors - seems connected (again) with CoS allocations (possibly the auto-renewal system).
Just over 2 weeks ago we identified a problem with a client's sponsor licence (a large UK concert promoter). They could input CoS data but could not assign CoS (it didn't even seem to try to load the page; showed a generic error message dozens of times). We tried using different browsers, different computers, different network connections; nothing worked. We also noticed that they couldn't see their "Licence Summary" page - all other pages worked, but they couldn't access the licence summary page or issue CoS. They had to seek an alternative sponsor for a band coming here the following day, as their licence was (basically) useless. This seemed a very odd and troubling glitch, which we immediately reported to UKVI's Business Helpdesk (they're still looking into it as I write, 17 days later).
Today we had another client (one of the very biggest booking agents) report the same problem. They were unable to view their licence summary page or issue CoS. We then noticed a link between the 2 clients: their annual CoS allocation had flipped over to a new year just before the glitch happened. So it seems the UKVI's software has a glitch connected with this 'flipping over' from one year's rolling CoS allocation to the next. This makes sense because both the licence summary page and the "assign CoS" page would check the CoS allocation figure in their database before the page loads. The fact the page isn't loading means the glitch is surely connected to the database record of the CoS allocation.
For instance, the big booking agent was perfectly able to issue CoS last Friday, then on Saturday its annual CoS allocation flipped over from the 2020-21 year to 2021-22 year (auto-renewal). Now on Monday the system won't show their licence summary page or let them issue CoS; their licence is, basically, useless and they are blocked from bringing in overseas acts on CoS. I've reported my findings to UKVI Business Helpdesk.
I sincerely hope this error can be rectified as a matter of the highest priority; sponsors are having their licences rendered unusable through no fault of their own.
(For background on CoS allocation problems see below items dating back to July 2021 - a series of glitches has plagued the auto-renewal system for several months now. This latest one is by far the most severe, because it means that sponsors who HAVE allocations of CoS can't use them).
August 6th 2021
(Later update to this article: after representations from the Concert Promoters Association of Spain, and the Association of British Orchestras, the Spanish government agreed to update its rules to properly reflect the fact they'd been letting overseas bands play there for decades without visas). I also got a similar assurance from the Portuguese government.
DCMS announcement about 19 EU countries now allowing visa-free touring for UK acts:
This was a somewhat misleading statement, as it tried to take claim for negotiating this status, when in fact it seems they've merely found out how these 19 countries treat entertainers from other non-visa nations such as USA, Japan, Canada, and so on. I mean, the day before the announcement, the DCMS knew about 18, so they've added Italy. That's it. The announcement should have been: "We've found out about Italy too, so that's 19 we know about". Most of the press reported it as a big success, so I suppose it achieved its goal; obfuscation.
Then came the backlash; with many sites and individuals heaping scorn on the DCMS' claim. These people knew about at least 18 of these countries 'all along', so it was a misleading claim. The ISM, NME, Guardian etc. are all on dodgy ground when they criticise the announcement though, because they themselves announced in 2020 that UK acts would need 27 separate visas to play shows around the EU (a claim I debunked immediately). They have not retracted those earlier claims, even though they proved to be wildly inaccurate. To my mind it doesn't help our cause (the cause of smooth touring around Europe) when both parties make inaccurate claims. We would be in a far stronger bargaining position if we were provably correct in everything we say, rather than resorting to panicked rhetoric and bile. To my mind the claims about "27 separate visas" have actually set the cause back, rather than advancing it....because the opponents know it's not true. Anyway, all this still leaves 8 countries still in the TBC bracket, the biggest and most problematic of which is Spain.
In Spain's case we know that non-visa nationals (that is acts from countries whose citizens don't need a visa to go on holiday in Spain) could (pre-Brexit) do a number of shows without needing visas. I personally have been doing UK immigration for 30 years, and a lot of the acts we deal with are on wider European tours - I've never known a US or Aussie band say to me "our passports are stuck getting Spanish visas". This is backed up by US music industry visa companies, who will confirm that US bands never previously got visas to play a few shows in Spain.
The Spanish consulate in London told me this was untrue, and that US bands (and all non-EU entertainers) have always needed visas even to play even 1 show in their country. So, either all the previous acts played Spain illegally, or the Spanish consulate in London is 'confused', OR possibly there is a workaround that the whole Spanish live sector knows about, but it's a complete mystery to their consular staff. Either way the UK gov should be consulting with Spain and getting to the bottom of it. They've had over 7 months.
Good news on the recent UKVI CoS allocation problems
UKVI has agreed to treat live entertainment sponsors' requests for CoS allocations more urgently, and to refund any sponsors who got caught in the position where they were forced to pay the £200 "priority processing" fee because their CoS allocations had dropped to zero. If you are an entertainment industry sponsor you should check your licence - if you shut down over lockdown your CoS allocation may have defaulted to zero because you used zero last year. If so, you should put in a request for a higher allocation, state your reasons for the number you request, and then (if you need the allocation quickly) contact [email protected] stating the reasons for the urgency. Hopefully this problem won't bite too many more sponsors. I'm happy that the UKVI actioned this quickly, but not so happy it took the press and other organisations getting on board before we saw action.
A new UKVI system glitch affecting group CoS:
On another note, though: this week the UKVI's CoS system has shown a new glitch whereby sponsors issuing CoS to bands sometimes get a message saying the CoS couldn't be assigned because they don't have enough CoS allocation. In 3 cases I know (2 of which because we issued the CoS in our office) the message was totally wrong. The CoS WERE assigned, the transaction went through, and the CoS numbers were there when we went into the View CoS section.
What to do if you get this error message CoS assignment failed. The CoS were not assigned as the limit of your allocation would be exceeded. Choose OK to go back to create and assign.
If you paid the £21 for the CoS, check to see if you got the Transaction Confirmation email. If you did, this means the payment went through so the message is probably incorrect (they don't take the money if the system blocks issuance of the CoS). Secondly go into View CoS, Search For Groups of Certificates, then type in the name you'd given to the group (such as XYZ August 2021) - don't bother completing the other boxes - hit Next. The group's CoS should all show up together, listed alphabetically. If that doesn't work, try looking up one of the surnames of a group member (the more obscure the better). In all 3 cases we know, the message was totally bogus. We've issued individual CoS without the error message popping up, so it might only be happening to groups. Let's hope they can find the cause and sort it out. I'll let you know if I hear more. All the best - Steve
July 29th 2021: Fully vaccinated passengers from EU and US will no longer need to self-isolate on arrival or do the Test To Release program as of Monday August 2.
The accepted vaccines for this are:
FDA:-
Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine
Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine
Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine (otherwise known as Johnson & Johnson. Single dose)
EMA:-
Comirnaty
Spikevax (previously COVID-19 Vaccine Moderna) Vaxzevria (previously COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca)
COVID-19 Vaccine Janssen
It's not yet clear what the situation is for passengers who arrived in the few days preceding August 2 under the old rules (whether the requirement gets dropped for them after Monday or not). But the dropping of this expensive restriction from Monday will help promoters, agents and artists, film productions etc. So that is very positive news, especially for concert tours.
On a couple of less positive notes:
1) UKVI is still being unhelpful to UK sponsors on whom their automatic CoS allocation system has foisted a zero allocation, because they haven't issued any Certificates in the last year. They're demanding £200 to process applications in a timely manner, which means they are earning money from the unfairness of the system. We still recommend all entertainment sponsors emerging from lockdown to check their sponsor licence for CoS allocation - it it's been reset to zero you need to act ASAP.
2) Airport staff are still tending to send working entertainers to the electronic border gates (E-gates); even though these can't be used by workers arriving with a CoS or PPE paperwork. The airport staff are thus encouraging illegal working and making it difficult for entertainment professionals and their UK sponsors to abide by the law. The rule of thumb is: Do you have work papers you need to show to a border officer? If so, you need to refuse to use the E-gates (see my update from Jan 2020 for a wider description of this issue and what an E-gate is). I know it's difficult when someone's telling you "it's fine; just use the E-gate", but those people are basically untrained queue-wranglers - even their bosses refuse to accept any liability for their incompetence. Be resolute; "Sorry, I'm working here - this needs to be activated and I need an ink stamp in my passport - this machine can't give me that so I need to see a human officer".
June 2021: ADVICE FOR EXISTING 'SPONSORS' (companies registered with UKVI to issue Creative and Sporting CoS)
As we emerge from the hell of the last 15 months, entertainment companies should urgently check their sponsor licence status.
1) Is your sponsor licence still valid? Make sure it hasn't expired while you were in lockdown or furloughed. If it has expired you'll need to start again from scratch, and UKVI will be very busy with companies applying for licences to employ EU nationals. They're also bound to be short of staff in the office.
2) Has your allocation of CoS reverted to zero? If you didn't use any CoS in the last 12 months, and you're on what they call 'automatic renewal', your CoS allocation will default to zero. This means you can't issue any CoS until that is rectified. If it's happened to you, my advice is to assess how many CoS you might need until your annual allocation period rolls over next (this may well be less than 12 months), and put in a request for that many CoS. Remember, EU/EEA nationals now need CoS too, not just non-EU. These requests for annual allocations, or increases in allocations, often take over 4 weeks to go through. UKVI seems to deal with them in tranches; so we'll see no approvals for weeks, then all are done in one day. Don't get caught out when the live entertainment sector gets back to normal - make sure you have ample CoS allocation now.
Good luck.
May 2021:
We have been closed since March 2020 but are slowly emerging from this enforced hiatus as the entertainment industry opens up to international travel again. We are flexi-furloughed at present but available to answer queries etc. We are doing a few CoS, mainly for film shoots and for behind-closed-doors shows or recording sessions.
May 2021: Post-Brexit UK immigration system for entertainment tours, film shoots etc.
Just to confirm, because there is a lot of confusion out there, that EU nationals now come into the same category as USA, Canadian, Brazilian, Australian, Japanese etc. They don't usually need visas for temporary work of less than 3 months (concert tours, film shoots etc.), but DO usually need some form of temporary work permission. This comes in 3 main forms......
1) Certificates of Sponsorship (CoS, for short). These can be issued by a UK sponsor and are a kind of work permit. As long as they're issued correctly, and don't exceed 3 months, they can be used as entry documents (although not by "visa nationals" such as Chinese - I'm concentrating on EU nationals here). For non-EU nationals CoS cost £21, but for most EU nationals the sponsor does not pay that fee (Bulgaria, Estonia, Lichtenstein, Lithuania, Romania, Slovenia and Switzerland are the exceptions). The sponsor might charge the band/ film company /agent a fee for issuing the CoS, because they have costs to cover, but the UK government does not charge sponsors for issuing CoS to most EU nationals. So, for up to 3 months the CoS can be used as an entry document, but for over 3 months the holders must get visas (3 months is the extent of the UK's concession to visa-free work in the creative and sporting sector; that is more generous than several EU countries). We deal with CoS all the time; it's what we know best.
2) Permitted Paid Engagements (PPE). This is an alternative to CoS, particularly where the inviting organisation in the UK does not have a sponsor licence. Basically the EU act/worker does not have the assurance of a CoS, but as long as all the criteria are met, the UK border officer can decide to let them in for a maximum of 1 month (not extendable). We don't get involved in PPE - if you want to use that route you will need to sort out the paperwork between the overseas act and the UK organisation arranging the work.
3) There are some Permit-Free Festivals. The term "permit-free" is somewhat outdated now, but it basically means the acts playing at those festivals don't necessarily require CoS or PPE paperwork. The festivals on this special list have a waiver from the UK government and can provide paperwork to the act that they show on arrival in the UK. This only applies to acts who are ONLY playing permit-free festivals; an act doing a mix of, perhaps, one permit-free festival and 3 normal venue gigs would not be able to use this route. They would instead need CoS or PPE paperwork.
"Why does the UK government website say bands and creative workers need visas to use CoS or PPE?" Because it doesn't assume you're a non-visa national. Many nationalities need visas to travel here regardless of purpose or length of stay. With (Tier 5) Creative CoS of 3 months or less, and PPE, people classed as "non-visa nationals" can use their CoS or PPE documents to request entry on arrival, rather than go to the expense and palaver of applying for visas. The government doesn't make this abundantly clear, it's in the "small print", but that could also be because they want your money. Visa nationals are listed here, so if your nationality is NOT listed here you are a Non-Visa National who can use a short CoS or PPE as entry documents (referenced above):
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/immigration-rules/immigration-rules-appendix-visitor-visa-national-list
NME once again misleads readers about visas post-Brexit:
Today (March 6 2020) the NME printed another misleading article mentioning costly visas as being required for EU bands to tour here post Brexit. Please see below my comments from the last few updates, which will explain why misinformation about visas (which about 95% of EU entertainers won't need) is providing confusion, when clarity and accurate detail is needed.
https://www.nme.com/news/music/government-warned-over-live-music-brexit-plans-without-clarity-the-business-of-touring-could-be-irrevocably-damaged-2621599
E.U. musicians - government muddying the waters when opposition MPs ask for clarity
27th Feb 2020 in Westminster 3 MPs separately asked for clarity on whether EU musicians and entertainers would need tier 5 visas after Jan 2021. Those MPs were Alex Sobel, Bambos Charalambous, and Jo Stevens. The government spokesman Kevin Foster gave confused and misleading answers to all 3. This was his stock answer:
Kevin Foster The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department
"Currently, visiting artists, entertainers and musicians can perform at events, take part in competitions and auditions, make personal appearances and take part in promotional activities for up to 6 months without the need for formal sponsorship or a work visa. They can also receive payment for appearance at permit free festivals for up to 6 months, or for up to one month for a specific engagement, under the Visitor route.
Artists wishing to come to the UK for longer-term work will need to do so under the points-based system. There will continue to be special arrangements for creative workers, which in future will encompass both EEA and non-EEA citizens".
Why is this misleading? Because the first paragraph assumes the artists are either playing at permit-free festivals (that's actually a very small minority) or are not being paid (again clearly not the scenario the questioners were trying to clarify). Most touring entertainers are professionals - their UK shows will mostly be paid and only a small minority will be playing at Glastonbury etc, so this paragraph was completely misleading. And the second paragraph is factually incorrect in that he says only acts wanting to work here for more than 6 months need to be covered within the Points Based System (PBS) - well that's absolute rubbish! MOST overseas artists working here (even for 1 day) are currently covered within the PBS. Most use Tier 5 CoS (Certificates of Sponsorship) issued by their UK booking agency or promoter, and enter the UK showing these on arrival. These CoS are almost all issued for trips of WAY less than 6 months - the average is probably about 1 week. So, for him to say only work exceeding 6 months needs to come into the realm of tier 5 CoS; the rest can be done within a visitor route, is plain wrong.
It's a good job Mr Foster isn't a booking agent! If he was, he'd soon get his acts stopped at the airport and turned away for lack of the correct paperwork.
UPDATE FEB 21, 2020 E.U. BANDS WON'T NEED VISAS FOR U.K. TOURS - Don't believe the hype! Likewise U.K. bands highly unlikely to need visas to tour in most E.U. countries.
I wish journalists would check with the experts before running stories saying all tier 5 CoS holders and PPE entrants need visas, therefore jumping to the conclusion that EU bands will need visas. Please read the all-important concession further down the Tier 5 page on the gov.uk site:
Tier 5 (Temporary Worker - Creative and Sporting) concession You can enter the UK without applying for a visa in advance if you:
- have a valid Tier 5 (Temporary Worker - Creative and Sporting) certificate of sponsorship
- are coming to work in the UK for 3 months or less
- do not normally need a visa to enter the UK as a visitor
You will not be able to extend your stay while you are in the UK, or switch to another Tier 5 temporary worker visa or Tier 2 general work visa.
This is how tens of thousands of non-EU band members and crew come to the UK each year without visas; they show their documents on arrival. If they all had to apply for a £244 visa half the tours simply wouldn't happen. I should know - I was instrumental in getting this vital concession back in 2008, and our clients' bands use it every single day. There is a similar concession for PPE and permit-free festivals. If you're not a "visa national" you don't need a visa - you show your documents on arrival. EU nationals will not suddenly drop from being exempt immigration control to being visa nationals. Nothing Priti Patel said indicates that. So, please....let's stop all this pony about visas being mandatory shall we?
So, how will the EU treat UK touring entertainers? Very likely it will treat us like other non-EU nations (USA, Canada, Japan, South Korea etc.). At present acts from those nations don't need visas to tour in EU countries. There is sometimes a local permission (like a work permit or a tax declaration) which is supposed to be done by the promoter, but most EU nations exempt touring entertainers from work permits unless they're there long-term. These exemptions vary; some only allow a few days, some allow months. But most tours in the EU are pretty simple in terms of working papers. There is zero indication that UK acts will fall below the way bands from the US or Canada are treated by the EU.
The UK not accepting EU carnets, and EU acts needing to fit into the current 3 immigration routes when coming to the UK - those are the things companies and lobbying bodies need to be focussing on. Visas are largely a red herring.
Update 20th Feb 2020: It looks like EU bands will need work permission to tour the UK as of Jan 2021. But - PLEASE IGNORE THE PRESS REPORTS SAYING ALL E.U. BANDS WILL NEED VISAS
The UK government gave its clearest indication yet (19th Feb) that EU nationals will all have to fit into the current immigration system as of Jan 2021, just the same as non-EU nationals do now.
Home Secretary Priti Patel announced a Policy Paper which mainly focussed on Tier 2 (long-term work permits). This generated all the headlines about low-skilled workers etc. A great many ill-informed journalists have run stories in the music and mainstream press, saying EU bands will need visas, which is totally misleading. Ignore them; most of them are cut-and-pasting the same lies repeatedly anyway. Especially misleading are the NME and MixMag reports today (20 Feb), (and the Independent report of 21 Feb) which add another spurious level of misery to the inaccurate visa 'news' ("applicants will need to prove they have £1,000" - they won't, because they won't need a visa!).
There were only about 3 sentences in the whole policy paper which mentioned entertainers; two of those were confusing and misleading, but paragraph 21 did make it fairly clear that the present Tier 5 CoS system, and existing routes, will be widened to apply to EU nationals after the transition period. (TIP - this statement was not aimed at the music industry; we are an afterthought - please bear that in mind).
What will this mean for existing UK sponsors? (booking agents, promoters, venues etc.)
We anticipate bodies that deal with several EU acts (especially booking agencies) should be looking to assess the number of those acts on their roster (and the number of personnel likely to travel with those acts). Then they should assess how much of an increase to their existing annual CoS allocation they might need. For instance, if they have 10 EU acts likely to tour here in 2021, and each act has an average of 8 people in its entourage, they should be requesting an increase to their 2021 allocation of at least 80 CoS. They should do this at least a couple of months early, because the UKVI traditionally take months to deal with these requests.
What will this mean for bodies that deal with EU nationals but have never needed a sponsor licence before? If Certificates of Sponsorship are the best route for their EU acts then they will need to register with UKVI as a sponsor. This usually costs £536, and the licence lasts 4 years. They should apply at least 3 months before they need to bring an EU act here.
EU musicians who are already based here should apply for settled status; we hear the vast majority of these applications sail through as long as the person has already set up home here and is economically active.
Overall, the main difference in bringing EU entertainers into the framework of the UK immigration system (for short tours anyway) is going to be that the UK companies handling these acts will have to handle paperwork which previously only applied to non-EU acts. Their workload on the administration side will increase commensurate with the number of EU acts they have on the road.
As with any new system or new regulation, we anticipate many acts will forget or not think about it, especially in the first few months. Any EU act turning up after Jan 2021 may need a carnet for their gear, and work permission for themselves and their crew (CoS, PPE or invite from a permit-free festival). Acts, agents, promoters and anyone involved with these tours would be advised to be prepared and to watch out for any possible changes as we approach Jan 2021.
Jan 2020: Reminder that Tier 5 CoS holders (mostly) need to avoid the E-gates on arrival in the UK, and an explanation of what an E-gate actually is.
E-gates are now used at many airports. They were widely introduced in the UK in Summer 2019. They're only for use by passport holders of the UK, EU, Australia, Canada, Iceland, Japan, Liechtenstein, New Zealand, Norway, Singapore, South Korea, Switzerland and the USA, and are not for use by Tier 5 CoS holders. They do not stamp your passport and they cannot activate or check your Tier 5 CoS (Certificate of Sponsorship). You do not have to use the gates - they prefer you do if you can, because it cuts down on the queues. But they always have human officers on duty sitting behind desks. CoS holders must see a human officer at a desk. About ten percent of people are rejected by the E-gates for random checks or because they don't look exactly like the passport photo.
What does an E-gate look like? Currently they have a glass sliding barrier 'door' attached to a metal post with a green 'go' sign or a red 'stop' sign. When the light shows green the next person in the line goes through the little door, and is encouraged to place their passport face-down on a scanner while looking into a camera (usually this is mounted on a pole and slides up or down depending on the height of the passenger).
If you are a Tier 5 CoS holder you need to avoid these and instead join the other lines to see a human officer. If a queue assistant tells you otherwise ignore them and join the queue to see an actual officer. If you use the E-gate you have no right to work and your sponsor cannot comply with their sponsor duties - you would basically be working illegally and subject to possible legal action (as would the sponsor).
If you mistakenly go through an E-gate you have ONE chance to rectify the situation. You must go and see a human officer and ask them to stamp your passport in line with your CoS, before passing through baggage reclaim. If you pass baggage reclaim you have screwed up and the situation could only be rectified if you can show there were no human officers on duty (and that isn't easy - it involves your sponsor jumping through a lot of hoops).
You cannot use the E-gates if you're here for PPE (a permitted paid engagement). This is because you must "declare" your intention to do paid engagements, and show evidence you meet the criteria for entry as per Visitor Rules paragraph 13. So, anyone holding PPE paperwork and strolling through the E-gates is performing illegally. This doesn't seem to be widely understood in the sector; and in fact a lot of border staff seem to misunderstand it.
Update Friday October 18th 2019: The Sponsor Management System (SMS) will go down at 4PM today until Monday morning at 7AM. Annoyingly this is just the latest in a series of shutdowns which could have an undue impact on the music sector in particular (and they never seem to rectify the system errors we face in dealing with group CoS). This means no CoS can be issued this weekend after 4 on Friday. Try to issue all necessary CoS before then. If you get an urgent job at the weekend and can't issue the necessary CoS please refer to the emergency protocol (you will be at the mercy of the border officers at the arrival port). Remember; not all officers will be aware of this....
In 2009 the UKVI told us this was the procedure to follow in circumstances where the CoS system is not functioning, preventing you from issuing CoS:
What happens if the system is down and the migrant cannot obtain a CoS?
If a migrant is required to travel and as a result of the system going down does not hold a Certificate of Sponsorship number (CoS), we would advise sponsors to email the arriving port with:
A list of all names of parties travelling
The associated sponsor and rating
The duration of the stay
Once the system has returned to working order:
The sponsor can assign the CoS;
UKVI will mark the CoS after receiving notification of entry from staff at the border.
What happens if the system goes down and the migrant does hold a CoS?
For anyone arriving at port under the Tier 5 Concession during such outages UK Border Agency staff will:
Check and verify the maintenance requirements; and,
Record the name, certificate of sponsorship reference number and passport number.
Unless there are other grounds for refusal of entry, the migrant will then be granted entry to the UK.
Once the system becomes operational after an outage, staff at the border will mark the Certificate of Sponsorship as used.
UPDATE 18th Sept 2019: The CoS system (Sponsor Management System) will be down for extensive update from Friday afternoon until Sunday morning.
Announcement from UKVI:
FOR THE ATTENTION OF ALL SPONSORS: SMS and the online sponsor application system will be unavailable from 16:00 on Friday 20th September until 07:00 on Sunday 22nd September, while we carry out extensive maintenance and upgrading of the systems. Please accept our apologies for any inconvenience this causes.
This means nobody will be able to issue CoS on Friday night or Saturday. All urgent arrivals' CoS will need to be issued before 4PM on Friday.
If you get caught out and can't issue an urgent CoS for an act arriving on Saturday: Please refer much further down this page to the emergency protocols stated by UKVI some years ago (these are little-known) in case you're unable to issue a CoS and get stuck. Basically Border Force should, hopefully, agree to admit the group or individual under 'temporary admission' until such time as the system comes back, when you can issue the CoS and send it to them. This will involve liaison with the border staff at the port of entry. Be polite, explain that the system relies on sponsors being able to log in to the government database (the SMS), explain the system is down for maintenance, and ask for help.
12th September 2019 - Contrary to Mr Johnson's statement about EU nationals needing work permission "from day one" of Brexit, they won't
The UK government today announced that we were back to plan A on the transition period for EU workers after Brexit - there will be no sweeping changes to EU nationals being able to work here, until December 2020. So the proclamations in August (EU nationals will need work permits from day one) were a load of hot air. The fact of the matter is that EU legislation has to change as well as UK law, AND (perhaps more to the point) the UK would really struggle to put systems and staffing in place to cope with EU nationals needing work permits from November 1st (with just 6 weeks' notice that always seemed an impossible task). So EU acts touring the UK seem to have some certainty again.
28th August 2019 - two booking agents have had their sponsor licences suspended due largely to a UKVI rule which is unfair on the touring industry. We urge UKVI to review the rule.
Last week we heard that a comedy booking agent has had his sponsor licence revoked by the UKVI for a few alleged infractions. I know the case quite well, and it seems somewhat harsh. I have seen a lot of the correspondence, and it's got troubling ramifications for the entertainment sector, because the officers concerned have been asking for things I think any showbiz sponsor would struggle to provide.
Basically it boils down to the fact that the UKVI (UK Visas and Immigration) does not understand the entertainment sector well enough. A visiting UKVI officer who assesses an entertainment booking agent should at least understand that it's not going to employ its touring artists, and isn't going to put them on payroll. But the officers in these 2 cases don't seem to have understood that distinction, and they're by no means the first (it happens quite a lot). The correspondence from UKVI refers to "employees", and the officers seemed entirely confused about how a booking agent might represent an overseas client without "recruiting" them via a normal job interview or advertising process. Yes, they really think that acts, from Kings of Leon to Idles, get gigs by going to job interviews with promoters.
This lack of understanding of how entertainment agents and promoters operate is an issue I have raised for ten years now, on and off, and it's clearly still prevalent, because today I heard from a rock music agent who may be in the same position as the comedy one. Tomorrow he has another meeting with the UKVI to decide his fate; his livelihood could be taken away.
What are the problems? The main one, apart from the general lack of understanding of "recruitment", is a UKVI rule relating to payment of non-EU workers. This is designed so that these workers aren't paid a lower rate than EU workers, and to keep the sponsor honest about how much they're paying their overseas staff members. The trouble is that this rule's wording does not fit large parts of tier 5. In fact it was originally only meant for tier 2. It was amended to include tier 5, without consulting or warning entertainment sponsors, in 2015. This change was contained in a 200-page set of guidelines, and the entertainment industry didn't notice it or realise its implications until much later.
I know the UKVI monitor this page occasionally, so I will say this clearly......paragraph 24.4 of the sponsor guidelines is currently not fit for purpose where touring entertainers are concerned. It should not be applied to touring acts. Where a band is being paid a group fee for instance (that is the case in probably 25,000 CoS each year), the sponsor cannot possibly abide by this paragraph. And the same goes for the many instances where payment to an artist is coming from a third party. I believe this paragraph needs to be amended ASAP. Overseas bands are not employees of their UK sponsor, and they are not paid a salary by the sponsor; paragraph 24.4 does not reflect that, hence it should be amended. I urge the UKVI to acknowledge this and to engage with the entertainment sector to try and come to an agreement on a better wording.
Any other problems? Yes, a few. At these compliance visits the UKVI officers seemed to start off with an approach that the sponsor's overseas acts were up to no good, UNLESS THE SPONSOR COULD PROVE OTHERWISE. So, rock bands and comedians, from the USA, Australia, Canada etc. (remember, these are nations deemed as 'trusted' by the UKVI and allowed to enter the UK through E-gates, hence usually not even asked any questions at the border) are suddenly treated as if they're now highly dodgy. If these 2 sponsors are to be believed then this approach went beyond reasonable, to being completely paranoid. There is no evidence to suggest that US rock bands or comedians are habitual overstayers or illegal workers. In fact a UKVI official told me some years ago that non-visa nationals in touring bands are "zero threat". Back when the PBS was introduced (2008) we were assured that sponsors would be trusted, and that any actions taken against sponsors would be 'risk-based and intelligence-led'. Those assurances sound hollow now. Perhaps the UKVI had evidence these sponsors had dealt with acts who'd done something wrong - but the sponsors say the UKVI did not make any specific allegations at all. They both were told these were random checks, not intelligence-based.
These sponsors have paid for a sponsor licence, and they bother to issue CoS to their overseas acts when they perform here. The UKVI did not allege either sponsor had issued CoS inappropriately to acts who did not qualify for them, nor did they say any CoS had been issued for too long. If these sponsors had wanted to avoid any scrutiny they could have done so by issuing PPE letters instead of CoS. The UKVI does not check organisations who bring in acts under PPE, so those organisations don't have to be inspected and don't have to meet any of these sponsor duties. It seems to both sponsors that the UKVI has treated them unfairly, because they've required them both to meet rules which were designed for tier 2 employers, not for those dealing with self-employed touring artistes.
I urge UKVI to acknowledge this and work with the sector on more appropriate treatment at compliance visits. Where a sponsor is dealing with visa nationals, or issuing long-term CoS, then suspicion is warranted, but where a sponsor's issuing CoS for touring bands of proven status, for short tours, there should be a light touch - these acts are not putting anyone out of a job.
The comedy agent was even told he should drive his artists to the airport and make sure they boarded their flights home, otherwise the comedians might over-stay. This is unacceptable, in my opinion. It seems to apportion an extremely high level of suspicion and risk without reasonable justification.
Several government departments hold a sponsor licence, so they issue CoS to non-EU workers of their own. I wonder if a UKVI officer would tell the DCMS that they had to escort their foreign executives out of the country the moment their employment contracts are up, otherwise they'll over-stay. I doubt it very much!
They also hammered the rock music agent for not reporting the fact that one of his bands had to cancel one UK show on a tour, due to illness of the lead singer. Their own rules on sponsor's reporting duties say the sponsor is compelled to tell them if a worker has to take 10 or more consecutive days sick leave - they do not say that a sponsor is compelled to report every single incident of short-term illness.
I am urging the live sector to get together and nip this in the bud. This is not the first time I've stressed this point (see the post below, from Jan 2019), but bigger problems keep on coming up (acts being barred from entry using CoS from Ireland, acts being sent incorrectly through E-gates, Brexit.......). This time it really needs attention, because UK businesses are being denied the right to bring in overseas acts, and I'm not convinced they've been treated fairly.
UKVI's approach to sponsors is often out of step with their colleagues at Border Force. UKVI would say any worker overstaying, even by a few days, is a serious dereliction of sponsor duties; yet Border Force yesterday told a sponsor that a 3-day overstay was 'not a problem' (they'd stamped a touring entertainer's passport for 3 days less than the period of work, and said it wasn't worth bothering to correct the stamp because it was only 3 days). The lack of consistency can be quite stark.
20th August 2019. Brexit latest - worrying for the entertainment industry (again)
It's hard to know where to start when you get back onto this old subject. No-one truly knows where they stand; and just as soon as you make an assurance the rug is pulled from under your feet. Yesterday the UK government seemed to contradict previous assurances that a transitional period will be in place until December 2020, and also seemed to ditch the previous agreement to admit EU nationals, who are working here for less than 3 months, without a work permit (Certificate of Sponsorship). This is very troubling for many business sectors, not least the touring entertainment business. If EU acts on tour here will need CoS as of November 1st then there is very little time for the industry to prepare for that. Part of the problem is that some UK events will be brought into the world of immigration paperwork for the first time ever; and others will have their workloads increased.
For instance, a booking agency with a mix of EU and non-EU acts on its roster might end up with 50% more admin to do if EU nationals are immediately re-classified as needing CoS for their UK tours from November. A second problem will be the annual CoS allocations these companies get (the number of work permissions they can issue for overseas acts to come here short-term). This annual allocation will usually have been set based on the number of CoS they issued last year; if that's now set to rise then they have to apply to the UKVI for an increased allocation. These requests often take over 6 weeks. If you want it any quicker (and a great many do) the UKVI charges you £200.
At present the industry is far from alone in being completely confused about the effects of Brexit on their ability to trade as normal. When assurances made by government ministers just months ago can be binned with no notice it's hard to even make plans.
#Brexit #UKLiveMusic
Update Monday August 12th 2019 - Portsmouth Border Force staff apparently waved through non-EU passport holders without stamping or scanning their passports.
This morning we heard of a US rock band's crew bus being waved through Portsmouth ferry terminal, having arrived from a show in France, without passport stamps and without using an E-gate. The crew included an old-school veteran who knew he needed to get an ink entry stamp and get his CoS activated, so he asked why that wasn't happening. The officer told him "as of May we don't do that anymore - you can carry on". This is worrying inaccurate........
1) Non-EU nationals need landing conditions conveyed electronically or as an ink stamp in the passport. You can't just wave them through with neither.
2) From May 20th 2019 E-passport gates, installed at many UK ports, could be used by US holidaymakers, but CoS holders can't use them, and all ports have been told this. The E-gate system scans the passport and checks for blacklisted passengers........but they didn't put the crew through an E-passport gate, because I gather Portsmouth doesn't have these installed.
3) Our government will presumably have no record of their arrival, and they were not given any landing conditions either in a letter or a stamp in the passport. So, it's as if they're not here - they don't know when they can stay until or what they can and can't do.
4) They would have been working illegally unless their sponsor spent their time and effort trying to rectify the situation (which they are doing). This means extra effort by the sponsor and by a specialist team at another Border Force office. This officer let down a whole team of others.
I'd hoped the 'officer' was actually just a port worker, so we rang the band's tour manager to get a description of what happened and who said what. He told us there were 4 uniformed UK Border Force officers together and they all said "You don't need your passports stamped anymore".
The Home Office is looking into the matter but wanted to point out that the majority of CoS holders are now being dealt with correctly, so this was an isolated incident. I agree it IS an isolated incident, but a troubling one nonetheless. Combined with other errors made on Friday (August 16) at Heathrow, it shows that sponsors face multiple problems getting the copies of entry stamps they need to meet their sponsor duties:
The problem starts with trying to convey to the CoS holder that they must not use an E-gate, but must insist on seeing a UK Border Force officer.
The problem can be compounded if the CoS holder manages to do that, but the officer then tells them they don't need a stamp.
And then there's the old problem of actually getting hold of the bands and crew members to get copies of their entry stamps when they're only here for a very short time. If the UKVI simply said to sponsors "We won't penalise you if you don't get all the entry stamps, if the people were only here for a few days" then this problem would be reduced by about 90%. It's the fact that sponsors are so fastidious about collecting all the entry stamps for their acts that show these errors. And they only do that because the sponsor duties threaten them with huge fines for not doing it.
UPDATE AUGUST 2019 - THE E-GATES ARE STILL CAUSING PROBLEMS, UKVI (UK Visas and Immigration) HAVE AGREED TO GO ON TRYING TO HELP SPONSORS WHO HAVE BEEN TOLD, IN ERROR, TO USE THEM. THE ISSUE STILL LIES WITH AIRPORT STAFF MISDIRECTING CoS HOLDERS.
After telling us that June 9th was the deadline (see below) - after which all E-gate use was to be deemed to be entirely the fault of the artist or their sponsor, the UKVI acknowledged (in a live entertainment sector meeting, July 2019) that actually they know the problem still lies with airport staff, and they will work with the sector to retrospectively vary the leave of some acts (not all - if acts wilfully ignore instructions they won't be helped). If the sponsor gets in touch with the same Glasgow-based UKVI team which deals with entrants from Ireland (remote clearance forms), and explains the situation, they will consider remotely varying the leave of the act concerned. This is very welcome indeed, but shouldn't really be necessary. It was totally obvious from the meeting that UKVI and Border Force have gone to great lengths to warn passengers (signs in the hall [although none at Gatwick South, we hear], videos playing on some intercontinental flights, instructions to border officers, etc.), as have sponsors issuing the CoS to touring entertainers, but the system falls down because of the airport staff (at Heathrow these are provided by Omniserv, who have so far failed to address this problem). These staff direct passengers to the E-gates without a thought for the fact that some people are ineligible to use them. It's THEM who should be shown the videos and the signs.
Often they are the only human the CoS holder sees, and they're dressed in a uniform. The passeners can be forgiven for assuming these ARE immigration officers (they're not). We are still hearing daily of artists using the E-gates despite being told by their sponsors that they cannot; it's a circle which the whole sector is struggling to square. Sponsors can only do so much - I told an artist 3 times in my instructions not to use the E-gates; it was even stated in bold type on the CoS summary TWICE (it said "I'm a CoS holder and I cannot use the E-gates; please show me where to go"), yet they still strolled through in a daze, having been told to use the E-gates by a "uniformed officer". As it's the norm in America not to question a uniformed official, they just assume what the "officer" says must be right. That is the crux of the problem - while these unaccountable airport staff are circumventing our border checks we will never have proper control of the situation. The government sees this as a reasonable price to pay for reducing queues, so it's given away a level of control in favour of speed. When all passengers saw a human border officer it was extremely rare to hear of an artist being incorrectly admitted as a visitor; with the E-gates in use, it's now happening far too often.
And the only reason this all comes to light is because the UK sponsor companies have to chase their overseas acts to get copies of their entry stamps. If they didn't have to do that, the border could do what they want; stamp the passport or don't - the only reason the sponsors cares is because UKVI threatens them with up to £20,000 fines per person if they don't get a copy of the stamp. If they dropped the threat the problem would disappear overnight.
#EPassportGate #EGate #UKBorder #livemusic #Tier5CoS
UPDATE JUNE 5TH 2019 DON'T USE THE E-GATES!
ANY TIER 5 CoS HOLDER WHO USES THE E-GATES AFTER JUNE 9 2019 WILL BE WORKING ILLEGALLY IN THE U.K. AND PUTTING THE SPONSOR'S LICENCE IN JEOPARDY
I have had many conversations and emails with UK Border Force and the private company whose staff have incorrectly been directing working entertainers through the E-gates. Border Force have said the private staff are mainly to blame (although their own staff don't help the situation - some have told bands incorrectly "You don't need a passport stamp anymore"), but that new signage has been put up in the arrivals halls and a warning has been put on the Sponsor Management System that Tier 5 CoS holders need to see a human officer. They have also offered a temporary solution for any acts caught out within the first 3 weeks (May 20-June 9). They've been quite proactive, once they realised the mess that had inadvertently been created, but they won't excuse E-gate use forever.......
THIS MEANS THAT IF ANY TIER 5 CoS HOLDERS USE THE E-GATES AFTER JUNE 9 THEY WILL BE DEEMED TO BE WORKING ILLEGALLY. THIS WILL BE CONSTRUED AS THEIR FAULT, REGARDLESS OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES, AND WILL HAVE POSSIBLE REPERCUSSIONS FOR THEIR SPONSORS. So all sponsors need to tell their acts not to come through the E-gates; and if they ignore those instructions the sponsor can face problems with their licence.
For their part the private company tasked with pushing people through the E-gates have apologised and said their management and staff worked with Border Force in the run-up to the E-gate expansion, but were never made aware that some people aren't allowed to use the gates (CoS holders, PPE, and short-term students). Hence they were pushing people through the gates without the knowledge that this rendered their work or study illegal. That is a failing of Border Force, for not communicating to Omniserv that some passengers can't use the gates. Omniserv said last week their staff are now being told to check first, and be on the particular lookout for bands and touring entertainers. It remains to be seen if that actually does filter down to the staff on the ground. Their Customer Services manager has been quite apologetic and proactive in seeking to get this right going forward, but it's obvious some people will still fall through the net.
Two of the 3 main players are trying to do their part (UK border officers and sponsors) but the elephant in the room here is that the staff telling people to use the E-gates are not UK border officers and are, basically, unaccountable. The UK Border Force are running scared of doing anything about Omniserv, because Omniserv are hired by the airport and Border Force can't tell them what to do (that, in itself, is a damning indictment of the fact our border has been handed over to private companies). This was supposed to be a 'bedding-in period' but it looks like going on forever, if the staff pushing people to the E-gates are the weak link.
I suggest a meeting between the UK authorities and the entertainment sector's biggest sponsors, to work together on a better and fairer system for the future. Yet again, Tier 5 sponsors got the raw end of a change on which they weren't consulted or warned; this has to stop.
UPDATE TUESDAY MAY 28TH E-GATE SAGA CONTINUES
We are still hearing bands being told things like "there are no agents for you to see - use the E-gates" and so on, despite senior Border Force officials telling us that's not the case. We have to believe what our clients are telling us; they have no reason to lie. So, either the airport staff are lying to people about them being able to use the E-gates (even when it's not legal), or they don't know that CoS holders can't use the gates (if so, why not?), or they're simply incompetent. Either way it's unacceptable.
Although a senior Border Force official has hurriedly given a sticking plaster solution for those she is informed about, people are still being encouraged to fall into this trap. So that undoes all the good work we try and do.
I have now complained to Home Secretary Sajid Javid. This is a shambolic situation; the booking agents and promoters spend thousands of man-hours on the correct paperwork for their acts.......they are what makes the system tick. Where it can fall apart is at the sharp end; the border. The border guards often used to make mistakes, but roughly 80% of entertainment CoS holders were dealt with correctly. Last week we were maybe down to 20%, because so many people came through the E-gates. Private crowd-control personnel can funnel CoS holders through a gate they're not allowed to use, seemingly with impunity, and Border Force are left chasing shadows, while the poor old booking agents and promoters (and us) are having to try and clear up the mess they've left and do the job they singularly failed to do.
UPDATE FRIDAY MAY 24TH 2019 E-GATES
This morning I received a call from a senior official at UK Border Force, offering us a temporary fix for any Tier 5 CoS holders who get directed incorrectly through the E-gates. There is an email address our clients can use to request a "remote" correction of their entry conditions (in other words, you send them some details and they stamp their approval on a document then email you back). The sponsor then keeps this on file to show the acts were not working illegally. Border Force acknowledge the massive expansion of E-gate has led to disruption and confusion for entertainment sponsors and their overseas artists.
So we have secured a 3-week window while the system beds in. Anyone who inadvertently uses the E-gates during these first 3 weeks can rectify the situation later (provisional system in place until May 31st, then extended to June 9) as long as their sponsor is on the ball and does something about it. Sponsors can contact us for advice on that.
Going forward we will work to try and ensure the airport staff don't keep on making these mistakes, by liaising closely with Border Force and trying to get the concerns of the sector through to the highest levels of the immigration system.
UPDATE THURSDAY MAY 23RD 2019 E-GATES
We have been complaining to UKVI and Border Force about the rushed, and bodged, introduction of E-gates for all US passengers. At least 5 bands have now been ushered through the gates, received no entry stamps, not had their CoS activated and can't legally work, so this problem needs to be addressed. This morning we spoke to a border officer at Gatwick North (yesterday an act came through there and used the E-gates, as they were told to do; they'll now be performing shows technically illegally). They sympathised with the way this has been rushed and offered the following advice:
"If your bands have come through the E-gates they can still see a human officer as long as they don't leave the hall. There is a 7-foot-tall sign saying "Do you need help?" and offering the service of being able to see a human officer. I would urge them to use this service - they can still get their CoS activated and get the correct stamp in their passport".
If any sponsor gets a call from a band who are at the airport and they can't understand what's going on, or they've gone through the E-gates and can't find anyone to help; call the Border Force office at the airport and ask to speak to an Immigration Officer.
Some common numbers: Heathrow T3 - 0208 745 6941
Heathrow T4 0208 745 4740, Heathrow T5 0208 196 2475
Gatwick North 01293 507075
Explain the situation calmly and seek their help. If they blame third parties or try to push the blame onto the CoS holders say that's not good enough; this is a new system and the airport staff should not be allowed to direct CoS holders into the wrong queues in the first place. And where they've let it happen they need to be proactive in putting it right. If they are still unhelpful, ask for their name, rank and badge number. Report them to [email protected]
If no-one complains nothing will get done. This is a mess that shouldn't impact your acts or your licence.
Keep a note of what happened on your case file. If a compliance officer ever tries to take action because you never got the entry stamps for these people, you should counter this by saying Border Force introduced E-gates for almost everyone on May 20th, with almost no notice, and the airport staff kept telling people, incorrectly, to go through the E-gates. That is why this band didn't get stamps - there were teething problems with the roll-out of E-gates in the weeks following May 20.
Let's hope they get this mess sorted out soon. In the meantime please stress on your CoS instructions; your acts need to refuse to use the E-gates.
*NEWSFLASH - MAY 21st 2019* - WORKING ENTERTAINERS SHOULD NOT USE THE E-GATES AT THE U.K. BORDER
Yesterday, with only about 1 working day's notice, UK Border Force decided to open the electronic gates to most non-EU travellers, dramatically expanding the use of these gates. This is an attempt to reduce queues, and we hear most passengers are being ushered through them, especially at Heathrow. But they should be checking first to discern the purpose of entry, not just assuming everyone is on holiday.
Passengers holding Tier 5 CoS MUST see a human officer. If they use the E-gates they will not be allowed to work here. The CoS doesn't get activated and they won't even get a stamp in their passport. Their CoS is, therefore, pointless and their sponsor can get in trouble for them entering on the wrong status.
It seems UK Border Force didn't think this through carefully enough, and certainly didn't consult sponsors about the change. Big entertainment sponsors have acts arriving pretty much every day, and several of them have already been caught out. We've heard reports of 4 US acts being ushered through the gates incorrectly. Their CoS didn't get used and, technically, their work here is now rendered illegal (although, naturally, we would argue that the staff at the border should be checking the purpose of entry before pushing people through those gates).
I stress again - YOU USE THE E-GATES, YOU CAN'T WORK AND YOUR SPONSOR CAN'T COMPLY WITH THEIR LICENCE REQUIREMENTS. YOU MUST SEE A HUMAN OFFICER - KICK UP A FUSS IF YOU MUST; WHATEVER IT TAKES.
We have written to our local MP, the Home Office, and spoken with airport staff, and more urgent action needs to be taken. In particular the UKVI and Border Force need to stop forgetting about this industry when they make new rules or new systems. They should have realised, as soon as they thought of expanding the use of these gates, "what people might be caught out by this? Are there any people who can't use the gates because of their purpose of entry". The simplest of checks should have made them realise one sector would be particularly impacted (and that sector is the BIGGEST user of CoS in the whole points based system - entertainment!).
Apparently, the people ushering the passengers through the gates are not actual border officers (they're mostly employed by the airports and often employees of a service company called Omniserv). Whatever - they're screwing things up too often. I realise they need to reduce the queues, but this approach is not fit for purpose. Once again we find the system is the problem - not its users. And yet again we're having to be proactive in sorting out a mess the system has created for its stakeholders without consultation or consideration. I would urge clients, and the industry as a whole, to seek an urgent meeting with the Home Office about the way the system needs to be improved. I also call for a reinstatement of the Arts and Entertainment Taskforce.
**CoS SYSTEM PROBLEMS - FRIDAY APRIL 5TH 2019**
The UKVI's Sponsor Management System crashed at about 1PM today. We were inputting group CoS when the system failed ('cannot connect to server' - yes, we checked and we can connect to all other websites and collect email, so the problem isn't at our end). These crashes on Friday afternoons are part of a trend we spotted last year.
One hour later it seems to have come back online, so hopefully it'll stay that way.
29th March 2019 The CoS system was so deeply flawed from the start that visa officers couldn't even see the main details on their screen - new information comes to light on the 10th anniversary of the system's introduction.
For many years visa-national entertainers (those whose nationality means they need to obtain a visa before they can travel here) have been liable to some bizarre refusals - any sponsor who deals with world music acts will be aware of that. I may have an interesting explanation for many of these!
Where a visa is refused the officer must state the reasons in a letter accompanying the return of the entertainer's passport. These reasons were often baffling; referring to the lack of something which was covered by the Certificate of Sponsorship. The officers seemingly ignored statements made by the sponsor about the status of the acts and their work history.
Over the last few months I saw some refusal letters which convinced me the officers were possibly unable to see some of the most important text on the CoS. On this hunch I lodged a Freedom of Information request asking specifically whether all the CoS text showed up for the visa officers deciding the applicant's fate. They confirmed on March 27th that some of the vital text CANNOT be seen by the visa officer. Specifically they confirmed the Job Description text cannot be seen; this is the biggest text field on the CoS, where the sponsor would clarify what the person does, how much experience they have, some background about them (such as whether they've performed internationally, won awards, been part of a group for X years, and so on). This is vital information. The fact this can't be seen by the officer means the whole CoS system (one which has been in place for 10 years) was fundamentally flawed from the start.
This explains a great many visa refusals. The Home Office says that officers are supposed to take this missing detail into account and ask the sponsor or applicant for any information that might be hidden; but we all know that didn't usually happen. They tended to refuse the application if anything is unanswered or missing. That meant a vast number of refusals were bogus. If a sponsor states on a CoS "this artist has released 5 albums over a 15-year career and been nominated for a Grammy award" and the officer can't see that, then that would explain refusals where the officer says "you have not shown how the artist is of international status".
The officers also couldn't see the text field "Give details of what the group will be doing in the UK" (a 1000-character text field vital to explaining the tour schedules of groups). This means the officer had no frame of reference for what the group was due to be doing here. They also couldn't see any venue addresses past the first venue, so wouldn't have seen the whole tour venues.
These "hidden" text boxes are only visible to the visa officers based in the UK. Any visa decisions made overseas (that was almost all of them until 2018) would have been made without the officer being able to see the sponsor's main statements on the CoS.
So, if you are a promoter, agent or venue and you have had acts refused visas because the officer wasn't satisfied with the CoS, you might be interested to know the officer probably couldn't see the most vital information on those CoS. Or if you are an entertainer whose visa was refused because the CoS missed some vital information - UKVI may have misled you in the refusal letter; the information may have been there, but their officer simply couldn't see it. What a system, eh?
28th Feb 2019 Bands entering via Ireland no longer frozen out of UK - Government audaciously claims the credit despite creating the problem in the first place
In an announcement today by the Home Office it confirms what I mentioned several weeks ago; that they have put in place a system whereby entertainment tours are not stopped from coming here via Dublin. This previously-daft situation has been rectified after much work over the last year. We initially identified the problem and started the campaign to get it sorted. The Home Office initially refused to take our arguments on board (so it's a bit rich now for the Immigration Minister to claim credit and act like a champion of the entertainment sector!). They'd basically moved the goalposts without telling anyone, and then refused to move them back until the press got involved.
The problem was being denied vigorously by a Home Office which was trying to force these tours to be treated as 'illegal' unless the acts got extra visas before leaving their home country. We were being told that these tours were breaking immigration rules and that we should put our heads back below the parapet and deal with it. But we managed to get an article published in Private Eye, and then things started to swing in our favour. After that the press started to snowball, and the Home Office had to treat the issue more seriously. When the Entertainment Agents Association and UK Music got on board, we were onto a winner........then the DCMS (Dept for Culture Media and Sport) also chimed in, and the Home Office felt they had to back down. I'm extremely glad they did, and the new system works well (we've used it for trial runs several times).
This goes to show, when you're in the right and they're wrong, and people start to see that, then obstacles can be overcome. The Home Office was clearly wrong to act the way they did, and once that was established, the outcome was assured.
Brexit 'no deal'; it looks likely only a small impact on EU touring entertainers coming to the UK.
In Parliament on Feb 7 Robin Walker, the Parliamentary Under Secretary for State for Departing the EU said in answer to a question about UK entertainers touring in the EU in the event of a no-deal Brexit:
"The commitment to visa-free travel only applies to tourists and short-term business travellers. Extra conditions may be required for travel for the purposes of work and for certain business activities. Musicians, comedians and other UK creative workers will need to check individual EU member state immigration rules for more information regarding visits for work".
This seems to say that no-deal would not allow UK musicians an automatic right to do short tours in EU nations. This would normally be reciprocated, so EU musicians would not automatically have a right to perform here. But it seems the UK has decided to allow EU nationals the right to work here temporarily without a visa (until December 2020).
In parliament on Feb 28th 2019 Immigration Minister Caroline Nokes said
"The Government has been consistently clear that once the UK has left the EU, free movement will end. In a no-deal scenario a temporary, transitional arrangement will be implemented until the future skills-based immigrationsystem comes into force.
In this scenario, once free movement has ended, EEA citizens will still be able to enter the UK as they do now during the transition period, for an initial stay of up to three months and will be able to visit, work or study without applying for a visa".
Caroline Nokes also said in Parliament on Feb 13 ......
"In the event that a deal is reached with the European Union (EU) on withdrawing from the bloc, there will be an implementation period between 29 March 2019 and 31 December 2020 during which nothing will change regarding the ability of EU citizens to come and work in the UK, including those working in the arts sector.
If the UK leaves the EU without agreeing a deal, the arrangements for EU citizens arriving in the UK after 29 March 2019, whether for holidays or for short visits, for work or study, of up to three months, will not look any different for a transitional period until the new skills-based immigration system is implemented in 2021. However, to stay longer than three months, EU citizens newly arrived in this transitional period will need to apply for European Temporary Leave to Remain, which, subject to identity and criminality checks, will mean that they can remain here, including to work or study, for a further 36 months.
This gives some certainty; the UK will not immediately make EU nationals fit into a temporary worker system (Tier 5) until December 2020. So EU bands can continue to tour the UK without the need for CoS unless the tour exceeds 3 months (which is very unusual - most UK tours last just a few days).
BREXIT - 'no deal'
We are hearing from the Home Office that EU nationals wanting to work here for over 3 months will need a work visa if there's a no-deal Brexit. This would seem to imply that short tours by EU nationals could be done without any sort of work permission (CoS), so only those coming here longer term would need a work visa.
The transition period (December 2020) agreed by the UK and the EU would, presumably, be binned if there is no deal by the 29th of March. But I'm hearing from an inside source that, because the system wouldn't be able to cope with a flood of new sponsors all registering after March 29, the government is likely to waive short-term CoS even in a no-deal scenario. They haven't committed to it yet specifically, but fingers crossed.
An MP named David Simpson (DUP) asked a question in the UK parliament yesterday about preparations for tours after Brexit. This was the answer given by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport:
"While the government is clear that free movement will end when we leave the UK, we are aware that continued access to international talent to work and tour in the UK is a key concern for the music industry.
As part of our wider preparations for EU Exit, the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport is working closely with the music industry to understand potential impacts and opportunities of EU Exit for the sector. The Department will continue to build on this engagement.
The government takes into account the needs of the whole of the UK, including the music industry, when setting migration policy. The new system will be rolled out once we have left the EU and after the implementation period ends in 2021".
U.K.V.I. REFUSE TO ACKNOWLEDGE PROBLEMS WITH PARA 24.4 - payment of overseas artists (Jan 2019)
It came to our attention a few months ago that UKVI (UK Visas and Immigration) had altered a requirement on paying overseas workers, and that this impacts adversely on the entertainment sector. We wrote to the UKVI to query the wording of paragraph 24.4 of the Sponsor Guidance. This says UK sponsors can't pay overseas acts in cash, and that they must pay them individually into each person's own personal bank account. This doesn't work for entertainment tours, because the acts are most often paid via their agents or an administration company. Furthermore sometimes cash payments are perfectly practical for touring acts, where they're only working at each venue for a matter of hours and may need local currency for their incidental tour costs. The UKVI altered the wording of the paragraph back in 2015 but nobody seemed to notice it at the time (the guidelines are 200 pages long). I suspect they just didn't engage their brains to consider that these people (touring acts) are not salaried employees of the UK sponsor.
I've sought opinions on this matter from a lot of the top UK entertainment agencies and promoters; they have expressed deep concern and disillusionment to find that the UKVI, not for the first time, tinkered with the wording of the rules without considering the entertainment sector, without consulting the sector, and without notifying anyone of the change. It seems we will have to forensically inspect the 200-page rules on sponsorship every single time they update them (usually twice a year).
We have urged the UKVI to re-word paragraph 24.4 after consultation with the entertainment sector. They wrote to tell me they'd consulted the CBI (a body which doesn't represent the entertainment sector in any real way; it's like the Football Association consulting the Inland Revenue about a new offside rule), and aren't minded to consider amending the rule. I have written again (14/1) to explain the reasons why we feel the paragraph is not fit for purpose and consulting the CBI was not sufficient on an issue which impacts the entertainment sector so specifically. I urge the Home Office to do a swift re-think on this; but if they don't, we are prepared for another battle; it's one I'm very confident of winning. I would urge the music industry in particular to speak up and try to get para 24.4 changed; it has already been used as an argument to strip several music industry companies of their sponsor licence.
Para 24.4 says:
All payments you make to migrants that you sponsor under Tier 2 or Tier 5 must be made into their own bank account in the UK or overseas. You must not pay them in cash.
DExEU CONFIRMS BREXIT WOULD NOT LEAD TO IMMEDIATE CHANGES IN IMMIGRATION RULES (Jan 2019), but there are still doubts about no-deal
The Department for Exiting the EU has written to music business lobbying body UK Music to clarify that there will be no immediate changes to border and immigration rules for EU nationals after Brexit. They've said there will be a transition period until December 2020. So EU musicians would not need a CoS immediately after Brexit and UK acts won't need work visas for the EU until at least December 2020. Looking forward into 2021 they have expressed that they will be seeking a "co-operative accord" with the EU to provide free movement for working entertainment acts. This is very helpful and provides a degree of certainty for sponsors. However, later statements (Feb 2019) seemed to say these agreements would not be honoured in the event of a no-deal Brexit.
SUCCESS ON CoS HOLDERS ENTERING U.K. FROM IRELAND (Jan 2019)
The Home Office has now reversed the debacle whereby CoS holders could not work here if they travel first via Ireland (see earlier). I would like to thank UK Music, Alex Sobel MP, Paul Fenn, and Live Nation, for their extraordinary help in getting some common sense on this subject. We have been lobbying and consulting on this process for around a year now.
The Home Office's Common Travel Area team has now (mid Jan) trialled a system whereby the UK sponsor can notify Border Force about CoS-holding entertainment workers who arrive in the UK after Ireland. They need to give 3 days notice and email a form. The system should go live within weeks, and will provide a way of getting CoS activated (plus a 'remote landing' clearance, by email). This will mean acts arriving from Ireland are no longer excluded from the usual visa-free travel most CoS-holding entertainers enjoy and rely on.
To avoid repetition of such problems in future I would stress again that the UKVI needs to consider the entertainment sector. After all, we ARE the biggest sector in terms of CoS used each year. To ignore the needs of the biggest sector just seems completely bizarre.
Christmas and New Year opening hours:
As usual we will take the opportunity, during this quiet time, to shut the office for Christmas and New Year. We will be closed from December 18 to January 7. We'll be able to respond to emails on an intermittent basis, and will continue to give advice, but won't be able to process any CoS during this time.
UPDATE DECEMBER 7 - the UK CoS system seems to be having trouble again this afternoon; as of about 3PM it keeps on kicking us out or not even letting us in. This keeps on happening on Friday afternoons; it's as if their server just says "sod this" and goes down the pub. UKVI is now aware of this trend and is investigating.
UPDATE FRIDAY NOVEMBER 16th 2018 - the UK's CoS system is pretty much down today (it was playing up yesterday, and their servers keep on losing the connection). It occasionally allows users to log in, but then won't save information, and the UKVI have reported the system has taken CoS fees without generating the actual CoS. It seems no CoS have been issued today, and (even if you're lucky enough to be able to log in) the system is randomly dropping out. UKVI are aware of the problem and working to rectify it.
These outages usually don't last more than 1 day, but this one is very badly timed, coming just before a weekend. There will be many sponsors furiously trying to issue CoS and keep getting their information lost by the system.
If you have acts arriving this weekend, and you're being prevented from issuing their CoS, we recommend you contact the Border Force Duty Office at their arrival port, explain the situation, and see how Border Force want to play it. Obviously if the system is preventing you from issuing CoS this should not be held against the sponsor or the acts concerned. Ideally the officers should accept that the system is down and agree to land the acts on 'temporary admission' until at least Monday. Hopefully by that time the UKVI will have their servers working again, the CoS can be issued, and someone can run back to the airport to get the correct stamps and show the CoS numbers. If an officer threatens to deny entry to an act because of this issue point out to them that the whole system relies on the CoS database working; if it is not working then neither the sponsor or the acts can do anything about that.
In 2009 the UKVI told us this was the procedure to follow in circumstances where the CoS system is not functioning:
What happens if the system is down and the migrant cannot obtain a CoS?
If a migrant is required to travel and as a result of the system going down does not hold a Certificate of Sponsorship number (CoS), we would advise sponsors to email the arriving port with:
A list of all names of parties travelling
The associated sponsor and rating
The duration of the stay
Once the system has returned to working order:
The sponsor can assign the CoS;
UKVI will mark the CoS after receiving notification of entry from staff at the border.
What happens if the system goes down and the migrant does hold a CoS?
For anyone arriving at port under the Tier 5 Concession during such outages UK Border Agency staff will:
Check and verify the maintenance requirements; and,
Record the name, certificate of sponsorship reference number and passport number.
Unless there are other grounds for refusal of entry, the migrant will then be granted entry to the UK.
Once the system becomes operational after an outage, staff at the border will mark the Certificate of Sponsorship as used.
UPDATE NOVEMBER 2018
Just as we are seeing light at the end of the tunnel with the Irish entry problem for CoS holders (see the September 1st update below for more info on that - it's taken many months to try and resolve a problem that the Home Office had created), we are now being plunged into another mess. It has come to our attention that, hidden in plain sight in the 202-page sponsor guidelines, is a rule that says CoS holders can't be paid in cash or paid a group fee. This was seemingly slipped into the guidelines a few years ago, but the Home Office never saw fit to declare it or notify anyone.
This has huge ramifications for the music industry in particular. Many artists are paid at least partly in cash for live shows. This is a normal procedure in this business, and the Home Office should not have outlawed this without giving the industry any say in the matter. Someone has amended the guidelines and just assumed that paying people in cash or a group fee is dodgy. It isn't!
So, once again, we find ourselves having to fight to get this changed back. This is another example of the Home Office randomly moving the goalposts, telling no-one, discussing it with no-one, and then waiting for someone to notice. Well, it isn't fair or right. I am going to be fighting to get this changed and I urge the whole sector to get behind it. Perhaps we need to surgically dissect all the rules and make sure they haven't inserted some other hare-brained clauses we don't know about.
Either way, it's clear we need a forum to represent the industry with the Home Office, and to force the Home Office to DISCUSS ALL FUTURE CHANGES LIKE THIS BEFORE THEY PUT THEM IN THE RULES.
This week (November 14th) I am opening a dialogue with the UKVI Policy team on this subject. The Musicians Union and the Entertainment Agents' Association have so far expressed support and confirmed they knew nothing about this change to the rules. We need to force the Home Office to engage with this sector before it pulls the rug out from beneath our feet. I would imagine most booking agencies and promoters are daily dealing with acts who are paid at least partly in cash or paid a group fee; how happy are they going to be to find out the UKVI sees them as non-compliant with UK immigration rules?
BREXIT (update October 4th 2018)
Hundreds of people have been asking us over the last year "what's going to happen to the system after Brexit?" We've been unable to say, because there was so little information to go by. This week we had our strongest indication yet from the UK government that EU nationals will need a work permission (and have to meet certain criteria) to work in the UK. What's that likely to consist of? Lacking any certain criteria we can only guess that EU bands may have to get the same CoS (Certificates of Sponsorship) as non-EU nationals and meet the exact same criteria. Whether any EU nations will need entry visas to come here short-term is less likely (visas are normally reserved for higher-risk countries whose citizens have push factors or have a history of non-compliance with their immigration conditions). We suspect the vast majority of EU/EEA nationals may need CoS but not necessarily visas as long as the work is short-term in the creative sector (the same way US, Canadian and Brazilian nationals are treated at the moment).
Naturally, if EU acts need CoS to come here then this will have a big impact on some agents and promoters in particular. One urgent consideration would be their annual CoS allocations may be far too low. Hundreds of registered sponsors may be putting in a glut of last-minute applications for allocation increases in February and March 2019, and the UKVI has not exactly been swift at dealing with those requests this last year. So that is a big concern. Then, after the initial changeover period (where lots of ill-prepared acts are bound to get caught out) the main difference for UK booking agents and promoters will be the increased CoS workload created if EU acts need CoS the same way non-EU acts do right now.
For instance large booking agencies who have dozens of EU acts on their books might even need to take on new staff to cope with the increased CoS workload.
We will try to keep clients informed as and when we hear more; the nature of these negotiations seems to be creeping towards there being some fairly last-minute decisions being made, which is not comfortable for an industry which needs to plan months ahead.
With regard to UK acts performing in Europe after Brexit: there is a lot of nonsense being talked about UK bands needing Schengen visas to perform in Europe. This seems highly unlikely to me; US and Canadian bands don't need Schengen visas, so why would UK bands? At the moment most of the EU deems bands working there (for less than 1 month) to be no threat to their resident workforce. So, for instance, a US band playing shows in Germany don't even need a work permit of any kind, let alone a visa. It's possible UK bands might need some sort of local permission from some EU nations, but I feel that's unlikely to necessitate actual visas.
Friday September 14th 2018: The UKVI's CoS system seems to be down today; we reported it to them at 9AM, but it was still not functioning an hour later. We'll keep tabs on it. If you try to log in and get a red message saying your password and user ID don't match; that is bogus. The system is down and access is being denied. Alternatively you may get access but then immediately get an error message and not be able to progress. It was fixed later in the day, and is back to normal now.
WOMAD AND U.K. VISA PROBLEMS FOR BANDS:
I agree with WOMAD organiser Chris Smith that the UK visa process seems to have, if anything, got worse over the last year or two. This has, in my opinion, been a slow and steady decline in standards rather than a deliberate attempt at being difficult. The overseas Visa Application Centres now do all the applicant-facing work; the applicant very rarely sees a UK government employee. Processing times used to be 1-2 weeks, with 3 weeks being fairly exceptional, but over the last year many applicants have been told their application could take 8 weeks unless they pay a premium to rush it through. This is simply profiteering by the VACs (Visa Application Centres; all run by private companies and likely to put profit before everything else). I would like to know the split; who takes the premium fee? Is it 50-50 between the VAC and the Home Office? Or even worse? Does the UK government actually see any of it? UKVI declined my FoI request about this, saying it was commercially sensitive. This, basically, confirms that the private companies running the VACs profit from convincing applicants to pay for premium services. And it seems lying to them about processing times is not beyond the pale.
Anyway, the situation has been sliding and I brought this up at my UKVI meeting on June 26. The UKVI denied it, of course (this seems to be their stock position; they'll only admit it when it's been proven beyond any doubt and published in the papers); but I think anecdotal evidence shows that where the UK sponsor is not a 'premium' one (paying thousands extra per year for a premium licence) then there are often chronic problems with the visa process. These problems usually boil down to the usual suspects:
1) Delays.
2) Inconsistency. Band members' applications get split up; some get their visa and some don't. Or some take 1 week and some take 3.
3) Errors in decision-making (as well as errors by applicants, it's also fair to say).
4) Lack of clarity (for instance, a CoS can be deemed worthless by a caseworker if the applicant hasn't provided separate proof of their bone fides. The caseworker usually does not give the applicant the chance to prove this halfway through the process - they can simply refuse, because the applicant didn't anticipate this outcome). [UPDATE - please see the update for 29th March 2019 - it turns out the visa officer cannot see some of the vital text on the CoS, and is therefore deciding the fate of the applicant without some of the necessary information]. I've also found evidence that VAC companies who lost the contract are still running webpages which give bogus outdated visa info and incorrect visa prices (VFS Global in South Africa, for one).
5) Lack of a proper (and swift) appeal process.
6) Price. Some can pay less than £100 per person (if their show is on the permit-free festival list, and they have plenty of time). But a great many are paying over £600 per person, to expedite their work visas. The nationalities who need visas are mostly low-income in comparison to the UK, and these fees are extraordinarily poor value, bearing in mind the UK sponsor, and the applicant themselves, are putting far more time and effort into this than the UKVI.
The fact that the applications are almost all handled in the UK, thousands of miles from the applicant (who has not been interviewed), and the fact that bands get split up into separate applications handled by several officers, leads to inevitable problems. There are also perceived problems with UK staff training and the quality of decision-making. I have seen many errors in policy (usually when officers have read one paragraph of the rules in isolation, and refused based on that). I've also seen 3 (and heard of more) instances where a musician applied for a 1-month visa based on a short tour, and was given a residence permit for a year! So, not only are these errors denying some musicians the right to perform here, they're also giving residence permits to people who have no right to them.
The visa process certainly needs improvement and, now that so many applicants are paying up to £645 for a short work visa, I feel the Home Office should no longer be pleading poverty as a reason not to improve the service. As a starting point I would like the Home Office to reinstate the Arts and Entertainment Taskforce, so that annual meetings between them and the entertainment sector can hone and improve the service they give entertainers. This should hopefully lead to fewer instances of tour cancellations, film shoot cancellations, and bad publicity for the government.
-----------------------------------------
September 1st 2018: The Home Office has finally agreed that the Ireland debacle (where non-visa acts are being told they need visas if they travel through Ireland) IS a change in procedure. They are looking into a workaround and hope to report back by November. This was confirmed at a meeting we attended, where the DCMS was also heavily involved. I'd like to thank Tom Kiehl at UK Music for securing this meeting; it will help the wider industry when this is finally sorted out. In the meantime we urge all workers who would be entering on a CoS, PPE letter or for a permit-free festival to AVOID FLYING TO THE U.K. VIA DUBLIN unless they already have a UK entry visa in their passport. This route is a disaster for bands on tour.
August 2nd 2018: Home Office repeatedly misleading the public on the Ireland entry problem for touring entertainers.
Their statement made to various press reporters (including The Times and The Guardian) contains the following error “there has been no change in legislation or operational approach.” This is simply not true.
In May 2009, when the current immigration system was in its infancy, the UKVI and Border Force got together with various representatives of the entertainment sector to give out specific instructions for touring acts to get their CoS activated and get UK entry stamps when they entered the UK from Ireland. This was set out in writing by the Border Force Assistant Director of Policy. Those instructions were a deliberate and clear statement that visas were NOT necessary for acts using this route to start their UK tour.
The recent statements from the Home Office (that the 1972 Control Order renders these tours illegal unless the acts get visas) is basically the opposite of what they were saying back in 2009.
Why they changed their stance, and when, are a mystery known only to the civil servants. But they told Irish immigration officers to refuse entry to 2 US musicians in May 2018 and ever since then they've been in denial about the 2009 arrangements. The Border Force operational guidance they issued to their staff on July 13th (page 34) says these acts need visas and their CoS are not sufficient as entry documents for arrival from Ireland. We have been fighting for a resolution to this, along with the Entertainment Agents Association and the lobbying body UK Music.
30th July 2018. Open reply to Dave Rolls (Private Eye magazine letters page issue 1475):
Dear Mr Rolls
I see from your letter that you feel the Control Order of 1972 should be obvious to anyone in the immigration business. I deal solely with the entertainment sector, and I’ll try to explain why we were not aware the Control Order had any relevance to our clients until recently:
At meetings, and in writing, the Home Office has repeatedly told the entertainment sector that their acts could come in from Ireland without that route creating a need for a visa. In fact, they gave specific instructions (by email, and at a Home Office-chaired meeting of The Arts and Entertainment Taskforce on July 29th 2009) setting out the mechanics of an alternative procedure to be followed when non-EEA groups entered the UK from Ireland. They confirmed that, previously, some border officers had been going by “old rules” (the Control Order?), but said henceforth their officers would honour CoS (Certificates of Sponsorship) as entry documents on the Ireland route. Many booking agencies and promoters can attest to that; it was the accepted procedure. As the Taskforce was disbanded in 2012 there has been no official immigration policy-specific engagement between the Home Office and the sector since then.
The system for admitting entertainers on this route without visas was outlined in writing by UK Border Force’s Assistant Director of Policy Implementation. I have a copy of this on file as hard evidence.
Since then, in their multiple sources of information aimed at the entertainment sector, the Home Office never mentioned the Control Order as being pertinent (still don’t, to this day). People go by what they can see in the public domain; if they need guidance on what documents are needed in order to tour here they look at the official guidance, or they ask someone like me. Again, I can only go by what I see online and in printed guidance, plus what I’ve witnessed at meetings. Until recently, our advice has been that this route does not create the need for a visa. In late 2017 I heard Belfast border officers were refusing to honour the 2009 policy and I investigated that (which took many months of back-and-forth). Then in May this year two US musicians got refused entry to Ireland and their promoter called my office in a panic. It would seem Border Force is no longer honouring the procedure they’d set out in 2009, and is pointing to the Control Order. In a meeting on June 26 the Home Office stated to me that the Control Order had been in effect all along, as if the 2009 instructions had never been given. I, therefore, had to inform our clients that the situation had changed, so bands either have to re-route to avoid initial entry into Ireland, or get visas. Why have they gone back on their stance since 2009? I don’t know – only the Home Office can explain that.
I contend that the entertainment sector was repeatedly given specific government instructions that no visa was necessary for these acts. If the Control Order made these instructions incorrect why did the Border Force’s Assistant Director of Policy give the instructions? Presumably they either ignored the Control Order or deemed it didn’t apply. We would have needed powers of clairvoyance to know that the Home Office would later go back on these instructions without warning or consultation.
Yours sincerely,
Steve Richard
Managing Director
T&S Immigration Services Ltd
PREPARE FOR A DEEP DIVE INTO THE CURRENT PROBLEM WHEREBY THE U.K. GOVERNMENT IS MAKING NON-E.U. BANDS JUMP THROUGH HOOPS IF THEY PLAY SHOWS IN IRELAND BEFORE THEY TRAVEL TO THE U.K. HERE GOES................
JULY 2018 - THE UKVI IS NOW TELLING ITS FRONTLINE OFFICERS THAT CoS-HOLDING ENTERTAINERS ENTERING FROM IRELAND ARE NOT ALLOWED TO WORK HERE UNLESS THEY ALSO HAVE VISAS IN THEIR PASSPORTS, BUT IS NOT TELLING THE PUBLIC OR THE ENTERTAINMENT SECTOR
Tonight (July 16th 2018) I discovered that on Friday (July 13) the UKVI issued new guidance to its frontline officers. This contained the clear statement that Tier 5 CoS Holders, permit-free festival participants and PPE document holders are not allowed to work here without a visa if they enter through Ireland. This seems to go against the guidance given to sponsors and the freely-available wider Immigration Rules (such as paragraph 245ZN, which outlines the conditions where a CoS can be used as an entry document, and makes no mention of Ireland).
Here is a link to the new guidance they are giving their own officers (page 34 covers the bit we're interested in):
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/725656/common-travel-area-v1.0.PDF
The UK entertainment sector may wonder why it has been told nothing about this change which is contrary to the guidance they've been given for many years (and are still being given by the guidance documents aimed at them), and why the UKVI has decided not to share this important information with them. Far be it for me to suggest they're trying to catch people out - I don't think that's the case. But why would you tell your own officers this rule, whilst giving the industry, and the entertainers themselves, conflicting advice? If this old rule is to be resurrected and given teeth, then surely everyone should be able to access it and know its ramifications. Let's at least have a level playing field.
MAY 2018 - SOME ENTRIES TO THE U.K. VIA IRELAND BECOMING VERY PROBLEMATIC
Due to the recent enforcement of a piece of dusty legislation from 1972, we cannot recommend that anyone touring/working in the UK transit via Dublin. If you are coming to tour the UK we highly recommend you do NOT book your flights via a certain Irish airline, if those flights necessitate an immigration check in Dublin before travelling on to the UK.
If you are doing shows in Dublin before coming to the UK then that SHOULD (in theory) be different – it’s only (so far) affecting people who transit to the UK via Dublin, to perform paid shows here. But there's even a big caveat to that... read on.
This legislation had sat on the statutes for 46 years without impacting any tours. For some reason something has changed that, and the Home Office has told regional airports to enforce it. I know this because an immigration officer at Belfast airport told me they'd done so. This was followed on July 13th 2018 by new operational guidance on the subject being issued to border posts. What prompted them to do this after 46 years is debatable, but its end result is very troublesome for the entertainment sector.
Entry through Ireland has, since 2008, always provided a minor issue for UK sponsors. 2008 was when CoS were introduced (these are issued by the sponsor, not the government) and they required the sponsor to get copies of the UK entry stamps for their overseas acts. This presented a problem for acts playing in Ireland before the UK; in that passengers don't get a border check when they travel from Ireland to the UK (so they weren't getting a UK entry stamp, just an Irish one). So the UKVI and Border Force told sponsors their acts have to seek a UK border officer when they got to Belfast, Glasgow or wherever. They were to get their CoS activated and get UK entry stamps. We have an email from 2009 from the Assistant Director of Border Force Policy Implementation telling us this exact policy. UKVI officials reiterated this policy during meetings of the Arts and Entertainment Taskforce. The Home Office now says this advice was bogus and should not have been given (begging the question - why did their own Assistant Director not know their own rules?).
In practice this advice worked for a while, then began to break down. Sometimes they’d get their passports stamped and CoS activated, sometimes they wouldn’t. When the acts couldn’t get a UK stamp that meant the sponsor didn’t have the right records for their files, but at least the tours went on as normal, so no real harm done. The general consensus in the industry has been that if the UK government told CoS holders their paperwork was good as an entry document, but then didn't put a system in place to validate those documents in Ireland, then that's their problem. A view which seems entirely reasonable, bearing in mind they've had 46 years to sort out a system.
However, as of late 2017 the Home Office seems to have told airports not to honour CoS if an entertainer presents themselves having arrived from Ireland (followed by updated Operational Guidance on July 13th 2018). Not only that but these instructions have filtered through to Irish border guards in Dublin, so those guards are now being told the UK policy is the reverse of what it had been. In May 2018 they refused entry to 2 US musicians who were transiting through Dublin on their way to a show in Manchester. Regardless of whether the guys had CoS or not, Manchester airport told Dublin the musicians would be working in the UK in breach of the 1972 Control Order if Irish immigration let them through, so Irish immigration refused them entry. Not only that but the musicians in question told me they were imprisoned overnight in a filthy jail cell before they could leave Ireland. They were given cold fast food for dinner and had to bang on the door and shout to get toilet paper. What purpose did this serve? The following day they flew from Dublin to Paris, then turned round and flew to the UK - whereupon they were magically acceptable to UK immigration, and were let in. Jailing them overnight seemed totally inappropriate and pointless. Yet this is the direct result of the UK's volte-face on this subject.
Quick facts/FAQ about this problem:
Why has this happened all of a sudden?
The Home Office (Policy section) has told UK ports that entrants from Ireland cannot work here regardless of whether they hold CoS, permit-free letters or whatever. I don’t know for sure what brought that on. At a meeting on June 26 the Home Office told us that the Brexit negotiations had brought the Irish border legislation into "sharper focus", so it seems that eyes were now trained on the Control Order of 1972.
Will this affect my bands playing in Dublin before coming to the UK?
Technically, YES. This rule is being interpreted as meaning they’re not admissible to the UK unless they obtain UK entry visas, regardless of what they’re doing in Ireland. So technically this means all acts and sportspeople should be treated as "visa nationals" if they enter the UK after Ireland. In practice however, the Irish Border Management Unit have told me that they will assess arrivals in Ireland based firstly on what they are doing in Ireland. If they are admissible to Ireland then they should let them in. If the passengers are just in transit to the UK they will assess them based on whether they are admissible to the UK instead. This is where the problem really has teeth; the UK ports are telling them not to let entertainers in unless they have entry visas. So, anyone transiting through Ireland to work here is liable to be sent home unless they have a UK work visa in their passport. But acts playing shows in Ireland before the UK have not (yet) been prevented from making those journeys.
What is the law they’re quoting? The one that’s been pretty much unknown for 46 years?
The Control of Entry Through Ireland Order 1972. In a nutshell it says people coming here through Ireland cannot do any work they'd normally be permitted to do based on their CoS or other work documents. This runs contrary to the way the CoS system has worked for entertainers since its introduction in 2008. It also affects permit-free festivals, PPE events, sports tournaments, researchers, expert witnesses at trials, and so on. It even runs contrary to the old work permit guidance for entertainers which existed from 1971 until 2008. US bands never got visas even back then, and the UKVI had never said on their website that entry through Ireland means bands need to get entry visas. In fact the Assistant Director of Border Force Policy Implementation wrote to us in 2009 explaining that CoS holders should present themselves at a UK port after they travel into the UK from Ireland, to get their CoS activated and their UK status legal. This advice has been used by most of the entertainment sector ever since. The Home Office seems to be denying they ever gave such advice, or implying it was totally bogus information.
Why can’t the acts ask to see a UK immigration officer when they fly in from Dublin to the UK, and get their CoS activated at that point?
This is what the UKVI instructed people to do, back in 2009 (as above - we have this is writing from the Assistant Director of Border Force Policy Implementation), but that seems to have been reversed now, without warning.
The UK and Ireland are a “common travel area” - when you get landed in one you’re good for the whole area; despite the fact the rules for Ireland and the UK are different. Onward travel (Dublin to Manchester, for instance) is not subject to a border check, even if you ask for one. It's an internal flight. The landing conditions you get in Ireland allow you to perform shows there for up to 2 weeks, but that conveys zero work rights for the UK. This disparity between the 2 countries' rules is at the heart of the matter. Irish border guards cannot honour or activate a CoS because they don’t have access to the SMS. If they call a UK port to check a CoS number those ports may be inclined to advise the Irish not to let the passengers in, quoting the Control Order of 1972 (and disregarding the specific advice from their own Assistant Director going back to 2009). If you insist on seeking out a border guard once you land from Dublin you now risk that officer deeming your CoS invalid (because you came via Ireland).
What is being done about it?
For my part I have been pressing the UKVI for a meeting on the subject of entries through Ireland for over a year, and that became urgent the day the 2 US Musicians got stopped and refused entry through Dublin. I have finally secured a meeting for June 26; UPDATE: The meeting on June 26 did not throw up any real lifelines; the Home Office Policy Unit is adamant that the Control Order stands, they've told ports to enforce it, and (whilst they agree the Control Order's wording is archaic and at odds with other systems for dealing with entertainers) they say changing it may take a very long time, because it would mean going through Parliament.
I understand several booking agencies have written to the Immigration Minister Carline Nokes, or their local MPs. The press is also starting to take an interest.
Is T&S sure this isn't a false alarm?
Well, here's a written answer from a policy executive at the UK Home Office, making the point:
"Unless subject to an exception, for example a visa national, in the Immigration Act 1971 or Immigration (Control of Entry though Ireland) Order 1972, a person entering the UK from Ireland is entitled to deemed leave. Deemed leave permits entry to the UK for a period of three months as a visitor. The conditions of entry for deemed leave, as specified by the Immigration (Control of Entry through Ireland) Order 1972 (section 4), mean an individual is not permitted to work in the UK. An individual wishing to carry out a paid performance, including those listed under the PPE provisions, or under the Tier 5 (Temporary worker) Creative and Sporting category do not qualify for deemed leave.
You have sought clarity as to whether the conditions of entry given to individuals on their arrival in Ireland can be given as deemed leave in the UK. Ireland and the UK operate their own separate immigration systems and, as mentioned previously, non-UK and non-Irish nationals entering the UK from Ireland are still subject to the UK’s Immigration requirements. This means the Irish entry condition is not valid for entry or as deemed leave in the UK.
Therefore, in order to work legally in the UK when travelling directly from the Republic of Ireland, a non-visa national wishing to enter under the Tier 5 (Temporary worker) creative and sporting category or as a PPE visitor should obtain a visa in advance of travel."
This is the opposite of what Border Force's Assistant Director told the entertainment sector back in 2009. Why the change? I don't know.
I would urge others (in particular the Irish government and the entertainment industry there, but also the UK entertainment, arts and sport sectors) to put pressure on the UK government not to drag its heels in re-thinking the Control Order. I have also sought legal clarification on several points regarding the Control Order (does it genuinely always apply, and is their interpretation actually correct?).
At the very least we believe the UKVI and Border Force should cease any actions to refuse entry or deny non-visa nationals the right to perform here short-term if they hold the right paperwork (a valid CoS or permit-free festival letter). This moratorium should be in force until such time as the rules have been properly assessed, the industry has been informed of the situation and has had at least 2 months to react. It can't be right that the UKVI has been telling the industry all along that CoS are entry documents, and then moving the goalposts without any warning or consultation.
The Irish border guards we have contacted seem to want to be pragmatic, but if the UK ports are telling them not to honour work papers (which would be honoured for arrival from anywhere else in the world) then they probably feel pushed into a corner.
If you are doing unpaid shows in the UK you can get around the whole problem; the Control Order of 1972 only impacts paid work. It specifically says “employment for reward”, so it does not prohibit shows where no financial reward is gained. And if the act enters the UK before flying to Ireland and then back again - obviously there's no problem with that. They can be landed as workers based on their CoS (note: 3 acts have recently been told by UK border officers they can get their CoS activated on return from Ireland - this, as we know, is total nonsense; so be watchful of officer errors in this regard). The Control Order only impacts where the first entry is into the Republic of Ireland.
EXAMPLES OF WHERE THE U.K.V.I. HAS GIVEN THE ENTERTAINMENT SECTOR THE IMPRESSION THAT VISAS ARE NOT REQUIRED (AND NOT MENTIONED THAT ENTRY VIA IRELAND IS DIFFERENT):
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/450237/Entering_the_UK_Arts_Ents_leaflet_August_2015.pdf
(This is guidance aimed at overseas entertainers - you'll note it does not say anything about entry via Ireland making everyone need a visa).
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/725905/Tier-2-5-sponsor-guidance_07-2018_final.pdf
(This is the guidance for UK sponsors, who issue the CoS to artists coming here on tour. Page 154 specifies that entertainment CoS can be used as entry documents; makes no mention that entry via Ireland necessitates a visa)
(From an email dated 2009):
It is a legal requirement that persons travelling into the UK from Ireland who are intending to do anything other than be a visitor for up to 3 months are required to present themselves to an Immigration Officer for the appropriate leave to be granted. Otherwise if they are encountered at a later stage without leave they can be treated as an illegal entrant. This is nothing new under the Points Based System and has always been the case for travel from Ireland to the UK. Nor is it unique to the music industry.
>
> I appreciate that you have been told different things at different ports of entry and I will be making sure that all ports are clear on what they need to do for these situations. You will then not need to contact me for each party, you can contact the port of entry directly.
>
> In the meantime, for the party travelling over the land border into Northern Ireland they need to attend Belfast International Airport. You can contact the Inspector there who is (name and phone number redacted). I spoke to them yesterday and they are happy to discuss arrangements with you. For (name of band redacted) I am waiting for Heathrow to let me know, but I will forward details to you once I have them.
>
> Regards
>
> (name redacted)
> Assistant Director
> Border Force Policy Implementation
> UK Border Agency
> 9th floor West
> Whitgift Block B
> 15Wellesley Road
> Croydon CR9 2AR
The above email says CoS holders can (and indeed, must) seek out a UK border post when they travel from Ireland to the UK after a show there. It confirms their CoS will be activated at that stage, and their passports will get a UK entry stamp. This procedure was confirmed to others at meetings of the Arts and Entertainment Taskforce between 2009 and 2012, and indeed UK ports followed this procedure many times for at least the next 6 years. If it was illegal for these bands to do this without visas why did the Assistant Director and several other senior immigration officials state the very opposite?
When bands tried to do as the above email suggests they sometimes couldn't even find an officer to show their paperwork to. The below email from UK Border Force dated 11th December 2009 relates to this. It also implies that the airport staff's occasional refusal to activate CoS was because they were going by "old guidance" (the Control Order?):
"Thank you for letting me know that issue with Glasgow is resolved. Having spoken at length with colleagues there I understand that, aside from them following old guidance, there is also an issue with the layout of the airport and this does present problems for them in dealing with domestic arrivals (which CTA arrivals are classed as). However, they now understand the importance of ensuring that Tier 5 concession arrivals through this route are properly processed. They are also aware of the longer term compliance issues if they are not properly processed. As a result I have had assurances they will follow the correct procedure from now on. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you do experience any further problems there.
Regards,
(NAME REDACTED) | HM Inspector | UK Border Agency | Border Force Policy Implementation | 5th Floor | Green Park House | Wellesley Road | Croydon CR0 2AJ |
Once again this shows the UK government was happy to admit CoS holders via Ireland without the need for visas, and put in place a pragmatic system to deal with them. Why is the UKVI currently denying all of this ever happened?
Email sent to a large UK concert promotion company (late 2009):
Sent for and on behalf of (Assistant Director of Policy Implementation; name redacted)
"...passengers arriving from Ireland who are doing anything other than a visit, are required to present themselves to an Immigration Officer. This has always been the case and has nothing to do with PBS. While there are no fixed immigration controls for flights from Ireland, and therefore no immigration officers immediately visible, passengers can still identify themselves to any airport official as someone needing to see an immigration officer. You don’t actually need to pass a desk/control as such, but should contact the immigration staff before leaving the airport/ferry terminal etc.
You have done the right thing in the past by contacting ports of entry to notify them of your clients’ arrival and it greatly helps to have full details of all passengers in advance so the appropriate checks can be carried out beforehand, thereby reducing delays on arrival.
And, as I said last week, I am arranging for all ports to be reminded of what to do in these situations. But please be clear that this is not a PBS requirement – it is a legal immigration control requirement governing entry to the UK from Ireland.
Regards
(name redacted)
UK Border Force Policy Implementation
Again this shows the Home Office were telling sponsors their acts needed to make special arrangements to present themselves on arrival after first entering Ireland. They are currently denying this was ever a policy, and saying bands who arrive via Dublin all need entry visas.
4th April 2018 - CHECK YOUR U.K. ENTRY STAMPS
We are getting a worrying number of errors in dates on UK entry stamps; since December 2017 we've personally seen several instances where CoS holders had been landed to the wrong date, meaning they would overstay. In 2 of these cases the CoS holder was landed to a date in the past! Watch out, because these errors could have impacts. We're also seeing far too many CoS not being activated; whole bands can arrive and only get one (or sometimes none) of their CoS activated. We will raise this at the next UKVI meeting.
8th March 2018
We recently attended a UKVI event specifically for Premium Sponsors, designed to give those sponsors more of an insight into UKVI procedures, changes running up to Brexit, and so on. At the meeting we were the only representatives of the music sector, and the film sector was represented by us and two others. The rest of the room was filled with banks, car manufacturers, NHS and social care providers, engineering, IT companies and even the big supermarket chains. We reiterated the fact that the entertainment sector should have a bigger say in forming the immigration framework it has to fit into. This is because THE MUSIC INDUSTRY IS THE LARGEST USER OF THE CoS SYSTEM (work permits) IN THE U.K.
This is a fact I gleaned from a Freedom of Information request. It uses more CoS than the IT and technology sector, and way more than the health and social care sector. At well over 30,000 CoS per annum we are the biggest stakeholders with the UKVI in this system; so we deserve the loudest voice and the most consultation. At present that is not the case - when this system was introduced back in 2008 the entertainment sector was chucked in with the "Miscellaneous" pile and almost deemed as an afterthought. We feel that, if the system is now going to change (due to Brexit or just because government policies tend to change over time anyway) then we need to speak with the loudest voice of all; louder than the banks, IT firms and industrial corporations. For that reason we are starting a campaign to get the Arts and Entertainment Taskforce (which existed in an older format until 2013) up and running again.
If you are a sponsor or an industry body, and you have an interest in improving the way the system works for our industry, then we'd be happy to speak to you about this. I would like to see a new Taskforce in place by August and I am starting negotiations with the Home Office to get that going.
On another note, the UK government is now in the process (started Feb 2018) of transferring all online UK visa applications over to part of its gov.uk portal. The process, as with all government initiatives, has a catch-all name; "Access". It's supposed to be streamlined and more intuitive; we have tried it and, predictably, found it to be cumbersome and needlessly intrusive. For instance it makes applicants list all their previous travels for the last few years (a nightmare for frequent travellers), asks for details about their parents (why?), demands details of your spouse and kids (even if they're not coming here), asks you to list all the addresses you'll be staying at in the UK (a nightmare for tours), and asks you to list even petty driving offences.
The only good news (?) to come out of the news on the visa process is that visa applicants will increasingly have their important documents (most importantly their passport) handed back to them after they've been scanned at the Visa Application Centre. The VACs will increasingly get the machinery to scan in documents and passports, which go to Sheffield or Croydon for processing, then the visas will (in future) actually be electronic. The visa holder would then use the email they are sent as their entry document, and will pick up a biometric residence permit (like an ID card or 'green card') when they get here. Hopefully we will start to see an end to VACs and consulates sitting on passports for weeks, or sending them halfway around the world to be processed. The only predictable problem with this procedure is that it puts more power in the hands of the VAC staff, none of whom work for the UK government, and they have a history if inconsistent standards.
28th November 2017 - Our PHONE NUMBER. Please don't use our old phone number (01557 339123) any more; we've been dragging that number around since we moved from Scotland, and it's becoming obsolete now. I think 6 years is long enough to get used to our 'new' number; 01969 663983. Cheers!
October 2017 - multiple reports of UK border officers not activating CoS. This seems particularly common at Gatwick; entertainers arrive showing their CoS, the officer stamps them correctly as a temporary worker but then does not activate the CoS on their database. This then leads to problems with the CoS showing up unused on the SMS, blocking any other sponsor from issuing CoS to the same people for 3 months. UPDATE - this is still happening in March 2018, and we mentioned it to representatives of the Border Force we met at the meeting in London. Update (July 2018): this error is still happening in at least 20% of cases; the CoS is being honoured but not activated. It's also not just Gatwick; it's happening at Heathrow, Liverpool, Manchester; in fact all ports. In particular we felt the need to contact the UKVI specifically about Heathrow's Windsor Suite. This is a posh area where VIPs and 1st class passengers are dealt with at Terminal Five. We've had several people arrive there showing Tier 5 CoS; and all of them were landed incorrectly as visitors. The UKVI has confirmed to us that this is not good enough, and they have spoken with Border Force at Heathrow to get this changed. I was not impressed by the reaction we got when we contacted the Windsor Suite directly; they basically said the officers must be right, so we must be wrong - this is a classic denial process which is flawed in reason and application. An excerpt from their own complaints procedure should be heeded:
Complaints are an important way for the business better to understand issues from a customer perspective, learn lessons and make improvements.
7th June 2017
It would appear that, once again, there are problems with online UK visa applications. The Visa4U online application form seems to have a problem communicating with the IHS surcharge site. We had reports today (verified by our experience this afternoon) that when you have made your visa appointment and completed the online information for the visa, the next stage is "Pay for IHS" (Immigration Health Surcharge). Almost all our client's acts are exempt this charge (due to length of UK trip being less than 6 months). But when they choose the zero option for the IHS it tries to take you back to the visa application, but shows an error message. This is preventing the visa applications from being completed.
I have to say that these persistent IT errors, coupled with our government's use of two poorly-performing outsourcing companies, means the UK ends up making the whole visa process a dismal and frustrating process. It's a VERY good job that most acts we deal with are not visa nationals, so they can avoid this horrible, incompetent 'service'. Basically the UK (like many other countries) has tried to save money on consular staff and services around the world. UK visa applications made in Germany (for example) used to be dealt with by one of our consulates in Germany. No longer; now the applications are made online (of course), but the applicant must then attend a Visa Application Centre (VAC for short). These are document-handling offices, almost all run by 2 companies; VFS and Teleperformance. The applicant has no choice but to use the UK government's chosen partner company for the country they live in. The VAC office staff take their fingerprints and collate their documents (passport etc.) in order to post or courier them to a UK visa "hub" (in this case Sheffield!). These VAC staff often seem to be rude and incompetent if the TrustPilot reviews are anything to go by - they get a rating of less than 1 out of 10!
The visa "hub" system means we now have just a handful of locations that actually issue visas - usually necessitating the passport and documents to be sent thousands of miles to be processed. The VAC staff, meanwhile, try to sell you extra "premium" services and their pushy sales techniques have led many applicants to feel conned before they've even got their visa. It's pretty obvious the UK government is making very significant savings by doing things this way (cutting customer-facing services in our consulates, charging for emails about applications, and routing almost all calls to premium rate lines or the VACs). Double bubble though; they should also (in theory at least) be making a nice little earner from these companies. You want your visa in 3 days and don't want to wait for an appointment? No problem - that's covered in this package for X hundred dollars. Or you can upgrade to the Gold Premium service for over $1,000 and (in theory only) get your application pushed to the front of the queue. The more money you have, the more you get pushed ahead of the other applicants. How these fees for jumping the queue are split between the VAC and the government is anyone's guess.
In our opinion, the fact our government chooses this way, knowing full well it is generally viewed as expensive, often shoddy, unfair, time-consuming and sometimes ruinously incompetent, gives a poor impression of UK PLC. If a company getting less than 1 out of 10 for customer services on TrustPilot is allowed to carry on with administering document-handling and customer services for most UK visa applications then that would seem to need attention.
JUNE 2017
Sponsors are reminded to be watchful of their sponsor licence details with regard to company changes such as office moves, staff changes, or company takeovers. It is possible (and has happened) that company mergers or takeovers, when not notified to UKVI properly, can lead to the UKVI revoking a sponsor licence and rendering invalid any CoS that company has issued. If you get bought out, move or have a shake-up in the staff dealing with your CoS - think about your licence and take the appropriate action straight away.
May 2017
T&S ARE NOW PREMIUM SPONSORS
We have paid extra to become premium sponsors, meaning we have much speedier access to updates, CoS allocation issues, and have a dedicated Account Manager at UKVI. This also adds a certain cachet to everyone we sponsor, meaning they can (when needed) access special treatment on arrival.
IRELAND - shows in Ireland. A client has recently asked us about the Irish regulations on gigs and sports events. The rules say that entertainment and sports workers who go to perform in the Republic of Ireland do not require a work permit unless the work exceeds 14 days in length. Hence any non-EU band who travels to Dublin can do performances there for up to 14 days but will be landed as a Visitor (not a worker). This visitor status conveys the right to take part in sports or entertainment events (paid or unpaid) in the Republic of Ireland for up to 14 days (the period of stay permitted will be longer - usually at least 30 days - but only 14 days of actual work are permitted). Any longer than that and the Irish promoter will have to obtain work permission in advance of arrival. This differs significantly from the UK rules. It is worth noting, however, that the UKVI currently technically believes any band that enters via Ireland and then comes to play shows here in the UK, to be illegal unless they have entry visas. I requested an urgent meeting with the UKVI about this in October 2017. As at May 2018 they had not addressed this issue so I have had to request this urgently be looked at. We expect a meeting in late May 2018.
RECENT FILM AND T.V. CREDITS -
Apart from our 'everyday' music work on many tours and bands' performances on TV shows, we're proud to have recently been part of the TV and film projects McMafia (new BBC series), Man In The High Castle, Loaded, The Current War, The BFG, Beauty and the Beast (highest UK box office 2017), Stan Lee's Lucky Man, Bliss, adverts by EE, Vodafone, Cadbury, Purple Bricks and more, The Night Manager, Downton Abbey, SS-GB, Sick Note, The Death of Stalin, Nasty Women, Ratburger, Nocturnal Animals, Three Billboards (nominated for 6 Golden Globes, 2018), The Hitman's Bodyguard and many more.
SPORTS EVENTS - It's worth noting that sports entertainment events can use the visitor status if the personnel coming to the UK are employed and paid overseas and are just here for a short tour. There are specific provisions within the Visitor Rules to allow non-EU individuals and teams to come here and take part in a competition or give a "sports event". So some events can choose to either use Tier 5 CoS or have the show personnel land as visitors. Some companies may view that the perceived benefits of CoS (more certainty the personnel will get in without delay) are outweighed by the obligations implicit when issuing CoS (especially the requirement to get copies of all the entry stamps from the personnel). If a show or act can use multiple immigration routes it is worth weighing up the options before making a choice - we are happy to advise clients on this subject.
FEB 2017
BREXIT - we've had a lot of people contact us thinking that Brexit may impact on their clients. Whilst this is a possibility, the truth of the matter is that a 'hard Brexit' has not been negotiated yet; it will take years to do so. Further down the track we will expect more details. It's possible that some current EU nations (whose citizens have the right to live and work here without any permission being granted first) might need work permits in future, but we simply don't know yet. If and when it happens it might have an impact on the entertainment sector, but nothing seems likely to change for the foreseeable future. We will keep clients posted when these changes are known - we will attend meetings on the subject this year.
May 2016 - update on the Immigration Health Surcharge - the errors in visa fees have now seemingly been corrected; a visa applicant who enters trip dates of less than 6 months (on the online visa form) should get an exemption code so that they don't have to pay the health surcharge. You only get this exemption if you are applying for a UK visa of less than 6 months.
October 2015
Despite assurances from UKVI in April this year it seems many CoS-holding UK visa applicants are being charged the "Immigration Health Surcharge". This is meant to be paid by people who are coming here long-term (over 6 months). We were assured in April that people coming for shorter trips could side-step paying the IHS fee (usually £200) but recently several bands have been charged the fee and then had it refunded. They were apparently prevented from proceeding with their visa applications unless they paid. This is annoying and we've complained about it - but the Home Office (as always) have bigger problems to think about.
We've also heard that, in the new online visa application forms, it forces applicants to nominate a location where they will collect their Biometric Residence Permit (BRP) once they get to the UK. A BRP is only required for those staying here more than 6 months, so this is sometimes not applicable. The form can't cope with that so it forces all applicants to select a location where they'll collect a non-existent BRP. If any client needs to apply for a visa we will provide suggested answers to these questions (and a BRP location finder).
CRIMINAL RECORDS - IMPACT ON U.K. IMMIGRATION
I think it's worth pointing out again that high-profile convictions can stop artists being allowed into the UK. You may have heard recently about another rap artist being banned by the Home Secretary for offensive lyrics. This came about due to a campaign by a political group. But artists don't have to invoke the ire of lobbyists to get themselves banned. Simply being convicted of an offence can be enough. If a client has an act with a criminal record please contact us well in advance before booking shows - it saves a lot of heartache in the long run!
May 26th 2015
The Home Office (UK Visas and Immigration) system for issuing CoS is not working.
It would not issue CoS yesterday, we informed their team in Sheffield about the problem first thing this morning, and as at 3PM it is still not working. This is preventing CoS from being issued. Your payment will be taken but the CoS is not generated and you get a message confirming that there has been a communication failure between the Worldpay payment site and the Home Office site. This is a big problem for the entertainment sector: CoS in this sector often need to be issued at VERY short notice. We have asked UKVI to notify all the UK entry ports, but fully anticipate some issues for people until this is resolved. We'll keep you updated.
As at 16.30hrs the problem had still not been fixed and, despite us asking the UKVI at 2PM to inform all entry ports about the situation, we have just heard that Heathrow Terminal 5's Chief Immigration Officer is threatening to refuse entry to any entertainers not holding a CoS. That's a bit rich when the organisation he works for is not able to issue any CoS due to a technical problem!
At 17.10 UKVI's Customer Relations team did provide us with a letter confirming the problem, so at least their own port staff will believe us about these issues.
Overnight the system was restored and we started issuing CoS at around 06.30 today (Wednesday May 27).
OCTOBER 1APRIL 30th 2014
A Home Office Sponsor Management System error today changed all job descriptions on all CoS ever issued to read the incorrect information (a Russian-speaking IT specialist's job description was inserted somehow into everyone else's Certificates). This would have had massive implications if it was not sorted out quickly. We immediately reported the error to a contact of ours at the UK Visas hub in Sheffield and have been liaising with them all day. Happily, at around 6PM the system was re-set and all Certificates once again contain the correct job descriptions.
We have been keeping clients informed of this problem all day. Happily the fact it has been rectified quickly means that no-one should have been refused a visa because of a bogus job description on their work permission.
Just for the record, that incorrect job description is pasted below. Hopefully this error only affected a few hundred CoS and was not used as a reason for visa refusals:
"Main responsibility is to work on project management for distributed projects in UK. Requirements: Enterprise Java (Java EE over 5 years) Experience of Spring Framework, Hibernate/JPA and JDBC. SQL and experience of scaling large data systems. Experience of working in agile (Scrum) and test-driven development. Experience of scaling always-on, high availability SoA or Web systems. Knowledge of REST, JSON, messaging or protocol servers. Experience of scaling large data systems (SQL/NoSQL/sharding/distributed messaging systems). Experience of CI/CD and supporting tool chains. Knowledge/experience of development for cloud based solutions desirable. Experience in leading agile development teams, both from management and technical perspective. Mathematical background is a plus. Russian language is a plus."
Update March 14th 2014:
This week criminal records caused UK gig cancellations, the UK immigration website went belly-up, and loads of visa applicants were inconvenienced. But we won another award!
The gigs cancelled were Ja Rule (plus Fat Joe and Twista) at London's O2, plus the Mike Tyson spoken-word tour. All because of criminal convictions; the organisers had to pull the shows at short notice. This is not a joke - many artists are effectively banned from coming to the UK. If you arrange a show by one of these artists and don't think about the immigration problems then you will have massive cost and credibility damage when the artist gets refused entry.
Anyway, back on a lighter note........ Tina (the T in T&S) won the "Most professional professional" award at the International Live Music Conference on March 8th. The awards dinner was a swanky affair at the Savoy Hotel in London and the appearance by David Hasselhoff will be remembered by all in attendance, except the ones who were too drunk to see him.
To be acknowledged and awarded by your music industry peers is very gratifying.....thank you.
In late Feb UK Visas and Immigration (which used to be called the UK Border Agency) started to move its website over to become part of the huge www.gov.uk site. This was predictably disastrous! The old site had pages of information that had been worked on and improved over many years; the new site has new pages arranged in a random fashion, there are mistakes and omissions, and it is dreadful to navigate because it's in amongst thousands of pages on stuff like VAT rules, planning regulations, crime statistics, and barn owl conservation.
If you're looking for the old site we found it here, although I don't know how long it'll be there (and it is not being updated, so it's frozen in time):
https://contact-ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/
The old adage "if it ain't broken don't try to fix it" definitely applies. People are having massive problems finding the information they need on the new site. A senior Home Office manager said even their own staff are complaining that they can't find what they need on it.
Visa Application Centres (VACs) - these are buildings overseas where UK visa applicants hand in their documents and have their fingerprints taken as part of the application process. They are mostly run by third parties who collate the documents and send them on to the British consulates. This has allowed the Foreign Office to (hopefully) save money on visa processing. It has, however, been criticised for being "faceless" and for allowing visa abuse (only some visa applicants are interviewed by an actual visa officer). The outsourcing deals for VACs seem to have been locked-in for 5 years and, because some were made in early 2009, they are coming up for renewal or cancellation now. This is happening in a rather piecemeal way. The biggest loser of contracts seems to be Worldbridge, and VFS appear to have lost several countries but gained some others. The main "new kid on the block" is a company called Teleperformance, which has picked up contracts in a long list of territories.
The company's own spin on this decision is here: http://www.teleperformance.com/media/1535728/teleperformance-statement-ukvi-contract-award-25-october-2013-form.pdf
The main problem with the change has been the lack of accurate information for applicants. Clients have had people in Brazil, France, Spain, Algeria and Ukraine impacted by this. It's been handled clumsily to say the least, with the www.gov.uk site being particularly deficient in information. The lack of warning about the changes has been the most annoying factor, because when people need to apply for a visa they often need it in a hurry and need to know with some certainty which office they will be attending. The gov website still doesn't accurately reflect where you apply in several countries. For instance it directs applicants in Brazil to the Worldbridge site, but they lost the contract in February and applicants should in fact be applying at a different office run by VFS. All very confusing!
___________________________________________________
Update Jan 28th 2014 - Criminal convictions coming back to haunt people.
Several times over the last 20 years or so the UK immigration system has sought to restrict people with criminal convictions from coming here, even temporarily. Fair enough – but they’d often done it very half-heartedly. Now they’ve ratcheted up the severity and made things a lot clearer.
In December 2012, to virtually no fanfare or publicity, the UK Border Agency changed the rules on who can and who can’t come here in light of their convictions. As this is starting to impact on tours by our clients I thought I'd shed some light on the situation; essentially now it comes down to jail sentences and goes as follows:
If someone has had a jail sentence of over 4 years they are banned for life.
If someone has had a jail sentence of over 12 months they are banned for 10 years from the end of the sentence.
And if someone has had a jail sentence of less than 12 months there is a ban for 5 years.
These bans are mandatory except in very special circumstances (like, for instance, the jail term was politically motivated by a dictatorship – this would cover political activists we don’t feel threatened by). Jail sentences for things that are not a crime in the UK (such as homosexuality) can also be waived.
Sentences that don’t result in jail time can still result in a refusal of entry but it’s at the officer’s discretion. In practice it would be harsh for this to be used as a refusal reason unless the person was an habitual offender and the officer was looking for a reason to refuse entry.
The first time this new rule was activated so as anyone would notice was when Mike Tyson tried to enter the UK for a tour to promote his book (December 2013). Technically the rules say Mr Tyson has a ban for life. His agents apparently did not know this. He was refused entry but is pushing forward with an attempt to do spoken word public appearances here in March. (update - these were cancelled as the visa was not forthcoming)
There are two rap artists applying for clearance now in New York and whose applications may be refused. This would lead to gig cancellation at a large London venue. (update - the gig was cancelled at the last minute)
These clarified rules mean that clients who have acts with criminal records must be more vigilant and careful in their bookings. There’s no point booking a tour if the artist can’t get in! If you know an artist has done jail time be mindful of the ban timeframes, or call us for advice.
There is some lack of fairness in all this, of course – if someone is well known then their conviction details will be in the press and on Wikipedia etc. If someone is not personally well-known then the officer they see is not going to know about their convictions.
But the main point here for our clients is that you need to be very careful about whom you book tours for and whom you issue immigration paperwork for. If an artist falls for mandatory refusal then the Immigration Officer will probably refuse them entry (the only doubt here is whether the officer bothers to check for criminal convictions).
_____________________________________________________________
UPDATE - December 2013
Recently the UK Home Office has unexpectedly tinkered with its rules for the creative sector, without consultation or public announcement. It has introduced a "Genuineness Test" for Tier 5 Certificate of Sponsorship holders in the creative sector. Individual visa officers can apply this as and when they see fit. In essence this means the Home Office does not trust all CoS, or the sponsors who issue them. This is a worrying move - any CoS can be called into question at any time. We would much rather the Home Office control and advise sponsors properly so that they cannot issue CoS inappropriately; that way this Test would not be necessary. We have written to the Immigration Minister (Mark Harper MP) to complain that in our view this is a backward step and to query why the sector was not consulted on the move or even told about it.
At the moment this new Genuineness Test is only likely to affect those CoS holders who need entry visas before they travel, and it is likely that applicants will be chosen at random for the Test. The Test can include the visa office asking for proof that each individual is a genuine entertainer and has genuine ties to the work they are doing in the UK (contracts etc). It is likely to cause a significant delay to those applicants who do get chosen for the Test, bearing in mind the applications have to go through a third party's office - the applicant can't simply turn up at the consulate with a bunch of CDs and gig contracts. Our advice for visa nationals would be to allow an extra 2 weeks for the visa process, or if they don't have that long they should assume the Test must be met and avert the problem by including extra documents with their visa applications from the start.
It is likely that the first time the Test was applied was to a member of the Sachal Jazz Ensemble, a Pakistani group who applied for UK visas in New York recently. 5 of the 6 members got the visas in time but the 6th was asked for extra documents and the delay this caused meant his visa was not issued in time for the London show. The show was cancelled. The case has since been mentioned in the House of Lords and various publications (Evening Standard, NME, the Express Tribune etc.).
I would urge the Home Office (whatever it's called these days - it seems UK Visas and Immigration is the name this week) to CONSULT with the sector before making changes like these. Going from my long experience I have no confidence the Test will be applied competently or appropriately, so we are asking for a rethink.
Last year I lamented the loss of the one and only consultation forum between the UKBA and the creative sector (the Arts and Entertainment Taskforce was disbanded by the UKBA for funding reasons). That forum would have been the perfect place for the UKBA to air its ideas and consult on their practicality. It's a pity the Home Office appears to have thrown away the opportunity for some consultation and instead garnered immediate negative publicity. This is not the way a professional outfit operates - it's going back to the times when the Home Office kept tinkering with the rules and then having to backtrack.
One more change to be aware of; sponsors should note that almost all sponsor visits by the Home Office will now be unannounced. This means people could knock on your door and demand to see your files without making an appointment or giving you time to get your paperwork all in one place. All sponsors should bear this in mind and know where their files / records are kept, and keep their paperwork up to date. We assist our clients in making sure they comply with the rules.
Update – July 1st 2013
It’s starting off as one of our busiest summers ever for T&S, following on from a very hectic spring where the live sector (touring bands etc)
made up the vast majority of our cases.
There was a fairly major UKBA system update over the last weekend (June 29-30), resulting in a few notable improvements, a couple of which we had specifically requested at meetings with the UKBA:
You can now search for a group. Woohoo! So, rather than searching for loads of individuals you can see the details of issued group CoS by
searching for the group by name. We asked for this one and we’re very glad it now exists.
You can now see when your sponsor licence expires – this was a rather odd omission on the initial system.
These are the 2 main new things which affect the entertainment sector. Most of the rest are either not very relevant or we haven't seen any implications for clients yet.
The new question which pops up when you go to create a group or individual about “is the person a national of an EU accession country” is very
boring – In 99.9% of cases the answer is no. But let’s be thankful for the improvements - even if the SMS does seem to be suffering from some teething problems today.
And, speaking of improvements, we can report that the UKBA has been trying to work with their IT suppliers on reducing the number of payment errors (where your payment fails or, even worse, goes through without generating any CoS). We have been working with them on this, trying to identify patterns of errors so that they can be reduced (and the occasional reboot of their servers seems to help too).
“Permit-free festivals”.
As festival season is progressing I’d like to remind clients of some facts about permit-free festivals;
If an act is just doing permit-free festivals (no other shows) then they can use the permit-free route without being issued CoS, but I would
point out that permit-free is not always any simpler than CoS. The organiser of the permit-free event has to log the band personnel’s passport and UK entry details with the UKBA 28 days before arrival (whereas CoS can be issued at far shorter notice), and the acts need to hold multiple documents.
We heard at least 4 instances in the last 2 weeks where an act playing a permit-free show was held at the port of entry because the immigration
officer didn’t accept the paperwork they had. The paperwork seems too complicated – whereas a CoS is just one piece of paper.
If an act is playing other shows that are not on the UKBA’s list of permit-free festivals then these are not covered – CoS would have to be
issued for these. And if you’re going to issue a CoS then why not just cover the permit-free show too?
Where an act contains visa nationals (those whose nationality means they need a visa before they travel here) then they will have to provide
bank statements and employment details / letters as part of the application process. There is a way round this when the applicant is a CoS holder.
All in all the “permit-free festival” part of the “entertainer visitor” route seem to be more hassle than CoS, therefore there seems to be little point in using it.
It’s starting off as one of our busiest summers ever for T&S, following on from a very hectic spring where the live sector (touring bands etc)
made up the vast majority of our cases.
There was a fairly major UKBA system update over the last weekend (June 29-30), resulting in a few notable improvements, a couple of which we had specifically requested at meetings with the UKBA:
You can now search for a group. Woohoo! So, rather than searching for loads of individuals you can see the details of issued group CoS by
searching for the group by name. We asked for this one and we’re very glad it now exists.
You can now see when your sponsor licence expires – this was a rather odd omission on the initial system.
These are the 2 main new things which affect the entertainment sector. Most of the rest are either not very relevant or we haven't seen any implications for clients yet.
The new question which pops up when you go to create a group or individual about “is the person a national of an EU accession country” is very
boring – In 99.9% of cases the answer is no. But let’s be thankful for the improvements - even if the SMS does seem to be suffering from some teething problems today.
And, speaking of improvements, we can report that the UKBA has been trying to work with their IT suppliers on reducing the number of payment errors (where your payment fails or, even worse, goes through without generating any CoS). We have been working with them on this, trying to identify patterns of errors so that they can be reduced (and the occasional reboot of their servers seems to help too).
“Permit-free festivals”.
As festival season is progressing I’d like to remind clients of some facts about permit-free festivals;
If an act is just doing permit-free festivals (no other shows) then they can use the permit-free route without being issued CoS, but I would
point out that permit-free is not always any simpler than CoS. The organiser of the permit-free event has to log the band personnel’s passport and UK entry details with the UKBA 28 days before arrival (whereas CoS can be issued at far shorter notice), and the acts need to hold multiple documents.
We heard at least 4 instances in the last 2 weeks where an act playing a permit-free show was held at the port of entry because the immigration
officer didn’t accept the paperwork they had. The paperwork seems too complicated – whereas a CoS is just one piece of paper.
If an act is playing other shows that are not on the UKBA’s list of permit-free festivals then these are not covered – CoS would have to be
issued for these. And if you’re going to issue a CoS then why not just cover the permit-free show too?
Where an act contains visa nationals (those whose nationality means they need a visa before they travel here) then they will have to provide
bank statements and employment details / letters as part of the application process. There is a way round this when the applicant is a CoS holder.
All in all the “permit-free festival” part of the “entertainer visitor” route seem to be more hassle than CoS, therefore there seems to be little point in using it.
Update Feb 2013
We have noticed a marked increase in the number of UKBA system failures when we go to assign Certificates of Sponsorship. We had 2 of these in January, then 8 in one day on the 18th of February! Since then we've had them virtually every day (in fact we've had 2 on Feb 24th, 3 on the 25th, 1 on the 26th, and 5 today). This is clearly not good enough. Clients who assign their own Certificates are also having the same problems. We have contacted the UKBA several times about this and they say they are looking into it. We have requested a meeting with senior UKBA figures to get this sorted out - when you are trying to issue Certificates to a group arriving tomorrow the last thing you want is to be getting multiple failures and having to do things 4 or 5 times. It is a waste of people's time and, apart from that, it means the UKBA is currently sitting on several hundred pounds of our money without giving us any Certificates. We hope to get a resolution to this problem and are pushing for a meeting within the next few weeks.
In the meantime if you pay for a CoS but you get the error message about the transaction going through but "Worldpay was unable to communicate with the UKBA" this means the CoS were not assigned. Make a note of the payment reference number (begins with a C) plus the date and the name of the act you were trying to assign to. You should get a refund in due course. If you get several of these errors please contact the UKBA to complain about it; the more voices calling for change makes that change more likely. You will have to go in again and try to issue the CoS. Multiple tries seem to work or fail randomly. Shutting down all your other web browsers and email programs seems to help a little (possibly just a placebo effect). The problem is clearly not at the user end though - and when you call to complain they will blame the payment company Worldpay (part of RBS). I suspect the UKBA's servers are to blame and that they can only cope with a certain number of transactions at a time (perhaps a Freedom of Information request might get them to admit what this number is?). Worldpay's servers require a response within a fairly short time-frame and so if the UKBA server does not make the successful reply in time it takes your money and leaves you without the "product" (the Certificate numbers).
We also recently had to complain via our local MP about UKBA Sponsor Licensing Team mistakes which led to sponsors being unnecessarily inconvenienced. These mistakes involved mis-filing and "loss" of recorded delivery documents, and refusing sponsor licence renewal applications for mistaken reasons (the same sponsor was refused twice for "paying the wrong fee" when they had paid the right fee both times). It is a shame that the UKBA seems to have a systemic problem with competence and blame - they generally refuse to accept a criticism unless it comes from an MP or in front of a panel of peers. A customer seems to be in the wrong until such time as they are proven to be right. This is why we complained first to the UKBA, and when they didn't suitably address the complaint, we went via our MP. MPs have better things to do, but if the UKBA only treats complaints seriously when they have to account to an MP then so be it.
It seems the UKBA is writing to model agencies and requesting meetings to "review their recruitment behaviours and how these work within the requirements of the Tier 5 sponsor guidance". This was not a surprise to me - it seems finally the UKBA is waking up to the fact that where a sector has no prescribed "code of practice" they will tend to issue Certificates with little regard for any resident labour impact. The Association of Model Agencies has a code of conduct but the UKBA will happily give sponsor licences to agencies that are not AMA members; and even those that are AMA-registered seem to issue 12-month certificates to models, stylists etc where they cannot easily justify that no EU resident can do the work. This places them in a tight spot when they get a compliance visit from the UKBA. I warned the sector and the UKBA about this 2 years ago and suggested that a well-worded code of practice would sort the problem out.
The lack of a code of practice is not a boon - it is a pain. In the music sector the lack of a code means that UKBA officers who visit booking agents etc are asking for "recruitment practice explanations" for acts that are internationally famous (you know; Justin Bieber, Pink, Metallica, and so on). If we had a code of practice, like the one for theatre performers, which is automatically met where the artist is of international status, then we would be better off. I think there should be more codes of practice and more certainty for sponsors. This would lead to more relevant treatment of entertainment companies by the authorities, and less abuse by sponsors who want to issue certificates to people that don't have anything unique to offer.
All in all we have several issues to address and it just goes to show that the Arts and Entertainment Taskforce still has a role to play - the UKBA should reinstate that and have at least 2 meetings a year.
Update August 16th 2012: the UK Border Agency's Sponsor Management System (SMS) went down today so no-one could issue Certificates of Sponsorship. The system came back up around 7PM. In case any clients experience this in future there is a contingency plan (of sorts) in place - the UKBA advise that where a sponsor is not able to issue Tier 5 (creative and sporting) CoS to an act that is arriving imminently (obviously not applicable to visa nationals or those coming for a long time), the sponsor should contact the port of entry and advise them of the situation. Provide a list of personnel details along with travel plans and details of the length of trip. Then when the system comes up you issue CoS and get them to the port ASAP.
We have found that some ports are not aware of this contingency plan, so we will ask for a proper one to be put in place when we attend the next meeting with the UKBA.
News update May 2012:
The new route for some entertainers, sportsmen etc to enter the UK and do some paid engagements without a Certificate of Sponsorship went live last month, but there has been a lot of misunderstanding of the route and some artists have already been refused entry due to not having strong enough support documents. We urge people to continue to use the Points Based System (where the acts carry Certificates of Sponsorship).
The new route merely offers an option to acts who don't have a UK sponsor. The burden of proof falls entirely on the artists who want to use this route. There are problems with this new "permitted paid engagements" route for the following reasons:
1) Immigration Officers aren't familiar with it yet. (Update - As of July 2013 some officers still aren't familiar with it).
2) Officers may not understand the criteria, and even if they do know about it one officer is bound to interpret the criteria differently from the next.
3) The burden of proof and paperwork falls on the artists themselves. They should provide bank statements, gig contracts, accommodation bookings, proof of their status as internationally famous, proof of leaving the UK within a month and possibly more forms of proof. The strength of this paperwork will be viewed differently by one officer to the next, so it will be nigh on impossible to ever reliably tell in advance which documents will be accepted and which won't. For instance, some officers will insist on original documents where some will possibly accept copies.
4) This route covers a maximum of 1 month with no chance to extend - and the artists must prove they intend to leave the UK within the month. Open return tickets might not be acceptable.
So, to clarify again on what is becoming a very confusing system:
Most professional entertainers and support staff should continue to use Certificates of Sponsorship issued from a UK sponsor.
Some entertainers performing at festivals which are on the "permit-free list"
http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitecontent/documents/visitingtheuk/list-permit-free
can do so under entertainer visitor but the organiser of the event has to log their details with the UKBA at least 4 weeks in advance.
As another option genuine amateur entertainers, such as school choirs, could use the entertainer visitor route.
Some paid performers and speakers can use the "permitted paid engagements" route if they have the necessary documentary proof (funds, invitation, proof they're a genuine performer, onward travel plans etc) if they are coming for less than 1 month.
A UKBA system IT update was carried out over the Easter weekend and included 2 small amendments we requested; that the CoS "expiry date" be changed to read "use-by date" - the term expiry was confusing to everyone and led to visas being issued for the wrong length of time. And the second change is that sponsors now have the ability to start a CoS from today's date rather than having to start them from the following day. This will allow sponsors to issue to artists who are arriving later the same day and performing that night. These changes will help all sponsors - especially in the entertainment sector.
News update March 9th 2012:
Hidden deep in a Ministerial statement on February 29th was a bit of a surprise, to say the least. The government is proposing to let in some entertainers who are working in the UK but don't have a UK sponsor. This was not expected and neither the entertainment sector, immigration law practitioners, or unions such as Equity had been consulted.
The government propose this to go live on April 6 2012 but the details are a bit sketchy at present. It would be restricted to stays of up to 1 month. Precisely what form of documentation they would have to bring with them (or, for visa nationals, the docs they will need provide to the consulate with their visa app) has yet to be announced, but it would seem to me that entertainers trying to use this route would have a higher burden of proof on them than entertainers travelling on Certificates of Sponsorship. For the time being it must remain our advice that most entertainers should travel with Certificates of Sponsorship unless they absolutely don't have a UK sponsor involved in their trip. We are monitoring the situation and have pressed the UKBA for clarification on the requirements for this new immigration route. Watch this space.................
News update Tues. November 15th 2011:
The UKBA has today agreed to go largely back to the old rules on compliance which were in effect prior to their latest change (October). This U-turn only applies to sponsors in the creative sector (Tier 5). We should now be back to where we started; sponsors only have to keep the entry stamps and contact details etc for the duration they have a non-EU act in the UK under sponsorship. It would have been better for all if the UKBA had thought about this before they changed the rules, but it's a welcome move.
News update November 9th 2011
Entertainment sponsors now have even greater record-keeping responsibilities (Oct 2011)
On 27 October the UKBA chose to announce that it had increased the record-keeping duties for sponsors (Appendix D). http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitecontent/documents/employersandsponsors/pbsguidance/guidancefrom31mar09/appendix-d.pdf?view=Binary
Some may ask: "What's the problem with entertainment companies complying with the same rules as hospitals or IT companies?"
Well, for a start booking agents, promoters and record labels don't hire the members of an American band or their crew. This is unlike the 'normal' employment model, where for instance, an IT company has a vacancy. They don't hold interviews, check qualifications etc, and when the bands come here to tour they are not taking a job away from anyone. The bands don't work at the sponsor's office. They might not even meet any employees of the sponsor.
Imagine you are a booking agency and you issue Certificates of Sponsorship to an American band who are coming here to do a couple of gigs. Your office is in London, but the band enters the UK in Glasgow and then moves to Manchester the following day, before leaving the UK. At no time do they come within 200 miles of your office. How do you get sight of their entry stamps?
What’s the point of this anyway? The band had Certificates before they entered – you know they have permission to do the shows!
It was previously the case that these copies had to be kept for the duration of sponsorship only (update: in 2012 we went back to the previous rule after the sector complained, but read on........they reversed it again in 2016). Update 2016: the rule was again reversed and currently the sponsor has to keep the copies for at least a year, not just the length of the sponsorship. There was no UKVI consultation on this; they just published it as an alteration without any instruction or notification to sponsors. Two fingers up to the entertainment sector.
There was an exemption on keeping these stamps where a band or entertainer was only working here for a day or less. That has been removed. (Update 2016; it was later brought back in again and is back in the current rules).
______________________________________________________________________
LOST IN THE WHEELS OF CONFUSION
(Oct 28th 2011)
What do you when the government that makes the rules on immigration doesn’t know what the rules actually are?
This is the situation we found ourselves in recently. A client was going to promote a sports event featuring 2 non-EU sports teams playing each other (an exhibition match, in effect, but the players were being paid). This seems to fall between the rules for sports visitors and sports workers / entertainers, so we called the UK Border Agency’s sponsor helpline for advice. They said all non-EU sportspeople coming to compete here needed Certificates of Sponsorship (CoS). We said their own rules on their website said a non-EU boxer coming here for a fight wouldn't need a CoS, and that the site gives similar examples such as Wimbledon or the British Open golf tournament. The guy said any sportsperson being paid needs a CoS, seeming to contradict what the website says. We thanked him and hung up, more confused than ever.
I was convinced this advice was nonsense. I know for a fact that when, for instance, Barcelona come to play a British club their non-EU players don't need Certificates of Sponsorship to play the match. If they did need a CoS who would issue it? They have no employer here. If an event promoter was to issue CoS to sportspeople would they have to follow a code of practice? What if they’re not registered with the sport’s governing body? This was all very confusing.
So we called the Home Office’s headquarters in Croydon and asked the same question. They said they could not give out that advice and that the sports players would have to speak to the British consulate in New York. We pointed out that the British consulate does not make the rules – you do. They stuck to their guns. We pointed out that the British consulate does not take phone calls, instead palming people off to an outside agency, who (again) do not decide on policy matters. They remained intractable.
So, we got 2 conflicting, unhelpful and totally incorrect answers within half an hour. It’s not often we have to seek advice on policy but when we do we expect a proper and correct answer, not a guess. This leads on to a similar issue that a national TV broadcaster had recently. They asked the UKBA whether they should cover a band’s entourage when they issue CoS for the band to perform on one of their shows. The UKBA said “No – you just need to cover the performers. The entourage can come in as visitors”. This led to the entourages sometimes being stopped at immigration.
When a record company client told us the broadcaster’s policy was not to issue certificates to assistants, choreographers, technicians and so on, we queried why. When we pointed out that the policy was against the rules they said “But the UKBA told us to do this”. The UKBA later admitted the advice given to the broadcaster was incorrect. The broadcaster now issues to the whole working entourage with foreign stars directly because of our intervention.
A recent article in the New York Times was highly critical of the current UK immigration system’s treatment of the arts sector. Whilst the article was somewhat inaccurate in some of its points I do have to say that there is a lot of confusion in the sector – and most of it stems from the UKBA not having a clue what it is talking about. This does not instil confidence. The referee is supposed to know the rules.
- Steve
On August 3 2011 Steve attended a meeting in Glasgow with UKBA sponsor management officers.
All UK regions were represented. I was the only non-civil servant at the meeting. I was there to put the entertainment industry's concerns about "compliance visits" forward. These concerns are mainly to do with the fact that when the UKBA has visited entertainment sponsors in the past they have often asked for irrelevant things, not understood the industry, not understood the concept that foreign acts here on tour are not employees of the sponsor, and in several cases have penalised the sponsors for supposed failings we considered unfair. I put the case for the industry, discussed ways to improve the system, and offered to help in going forward. The UKBA is to redraw its training programs and will work with the entertainment industry in making its visits more relevant.
Sponsors now have to obtain the entry stamps from all the people they sponsor plus their contact details (address and phone for every day they are in the UK) and keep them on file until they have been seen at the sponsor's premises by a UKBA visiting officer. This could be 2 years or more. Previously you only had to keep these documents for the duration an act was here on tour. Update 2016: this was later reversed at our behest, but was then reversed again (so you now have to keep the records for at least 1 year as of 2016). No consultation was entered into.
Notes from the "Arts & Entertainment" Taskforce meeting on Friday 17th June 2011.
We remain the only representative on the panel for the recorded music industry - the live sector is quite well represented, as are film, dance, theatre etc.
The Taskforce is an interface between the entertainment industries and the UK immigration system. It is chaired by the UK Border Agency.
At the meeting the UKBA seemed to have forgotten the outstanding action point from previous meetings; that they were supposed to give an answer to my proposal made 2 meetings ago (which was that sponsors in the entertainment sector who issue short-term CoS to non-visa nationals find it impossible to collect all the entry stamps from the acts they sponsor, so they should be exempted from this requirement or the requirement should be loosened). The UKBA agreed to provide an answer by Tuesday June 21, but failed to do so. It has up 'til now been the UKBA's policy to demand sponsors keep all entry stamps unless an act is here for less than 24 hours - we want them to increase this 24-hour exemption to at least a week - preferably more. Our view is that these people (who don't require entry visas) are no threat to the UK and are not employees of the sponsor, so the UKBA's point about "prevention of illegal working" is moot. The panel members representing the live music sector agree with us on this. We await a response from the UKBA.
UPDATE JULY 2018 - I raised this exact same point at a UKVI meeting on 26th June 2018. 7 years on from the Taskforce meeting the UKVI has still not addressed this point, and seemed to be acting as if it's the first time the idea has been mentioned.
Agenda points:
Highly Trusted Sponsors
This is a proposal (in consultation only) that some sponsors should be allowed to apply for an elevated status that allows them to get a dedicated helpline, speedier resolution of SMS updates, and that those they sponsor would have to provide fewer documents when they apply for an entry visa. The sponsor would have to issue a lot of Certificates to be considered and would have to have an excellent record of compliance with the system. My view is that this is mainly aimed at Tier 2 sponsors who employ lots of foreign nationals - its only benefit to the entertainment sector might be in the dedicated helpline and speeding up the handling of SMS system requests (such as changing the Authorising Officer or asking for a larger allocation of CoS). But because most touring entertainment personnel don't need entry visas (and those who do don't need to prove qualifications or pay rates) a reduction in visa application documents won't be of much use to the sector.
Update 28 Oct 2011 - the name has been changed to "Premium sponsor". The fee would be either £8,000 or £20,000 per annum depending on the size of the company (SMEs get the lower rate). This cost would vastly outweigh any benefit for the entertainment sector so we told the UKBA this would be of very limited use to the sector.
Restricting the right to settlement
The UKBA is consulting on whether to restrict various routes to settlement (permanent right to live and work in the UK). This was only really relevant to other sectors (domestic workers with foreign diplomats posted here, religious workers etc).
Online visa applications
People who need entry visas mostly already do the main application form online, but in some countries the application process is still paper-based. This will change by late 2012 and all applications will be made online. The only issues the music sector raised about this were that some countries' internet access was still likely to be very bad / very limited, and that a greater reliance on web applications does tend to mean that the consulates who deal with the applications don't have ANY face-to-face or even telephone enquiry services. Consulates that have gone over to online applications tend to be more difficult to contact when there is a query or an emergency. This leads to great frustration, especially for agencies dealing with acts from Africa, Asia etc., whose visa applications often take too long or are refused on technicalities. The UKBA agreed to talk with their colleagues at UK Visas with a view to working out a policy so that touring entertainers were maybe dealt with in a more streamlined way, because of the extremely time-sensitive nature of their visa applications.
Feedback from sponsor "compliance visits"
Panel members from the music sector have expressed concerns about visits by UKBA officers. These officers tend to expect that the sponsor is actually employing those they issue CoS to, and that the people are filling a vacancy in the UK. They ask for things like employment contracts, NI numbers, proof of recruitment efforts, qualifications, and so on. Most of this is irrelevant for internationally famous recording artists and their entourages. The main point is that touring acts are NOT employees of their sponsor. I have made these points again and again. At the meeting I told the panel that some large, and very reputable, booking agents had been visited by the UKBA and been penalised for not having employment contracts with all their artists, and not being able to prove what recruitment methods they used before "employing" foreign bands. The panel agreed this was inappropriate. I have now (since the meeting) had a teleconference with the UKBA officer who is drawing up new guidelines for visits to entertainment companies. He has taken on board most of my suggestions. Hopefully this will lead to more relevant visits. There are some abuses of the immigration system within the entertainment sector, but very few; and those that do exist are not being caught by the current system because the officers don't really know what to look for. Hopefully that will improve when the new guidelines come out.
The "exceptional talent" visa route was discussed briefly. It was due to be in place some months ago but has been delayed while the UKBA tinkers with the criteria a little. In essence around 300 visas per year will be available to "exceptionally talented" people from outside the EU to come and work here without the need for a sponsor. I pointed out that this pretty much replaces the "writer/composer/artist" route that was taken away in 2008 - with the only difference being that the people will have to be endorsed by the Arts Council. The UKBA is due to release details of the criteria and application process within the next couple of months.
T&S made 2 formal requests for changes to the SMS in the next IT update; that the term "expiry date" be changed on all CoS to read "use-by date" instead. This is because at the moment most people misinterpret the expiry date as being the date they can work until. This is foolish because the expiry date is hard-wired at 3 months from the issue date, regardless of how long the work has been approved for. This has led to people's passports being stamped for too long or too short a time. It has led to some people being denied entry and some working illegally past their passport stamp.
We also requested that the system be changed to allow work dates to start on the date of issue. At the moment the system will not let you start a CoS today, you must start it tomorrow or later. That's no use when an act needs CoS the same day for a show that night. This led to several problems for acts when they got to the UK - some immigration officers were refusing to admit them until tomorrow - which would mean they'd have to cancel their gig.
Update 28 Oct 2011 - both requests have been approved and will be incorporated in an IT update in April 2012. This is welcome change.
