Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

'Sight-seeing' is not a good enough reason to visit the UK?

B

BoyBach

macrumors 68040
Original poster
Feb 24, 2006
3,031
13
'Ridiculous' visa rulings set out

UK tourist visas are often denied to would-be visitors because they "plan a holiday for no particular purpose other than sightseeing", a report says.

Others were turned down because they had never previously taken any foreign travel or could not speak English.

The "ridiculous reasons" for rejecting visas were set out in a report by the independent monitor of UK visas.

Linda Costelloe Baker's report said that despite such flaws there had been "significant improvement in quality."

But she said entry clearance officers could use "some ridiculous reasons when refusing visa for tourist visits".

She said a common reason for refusal was "you wish to go to the UK for a holiday. You have never previously undertaken any foreign travel before and I can see little reason for this trip".

In her report she says "this is a common reason for refusal but there was a first time for everyone who has gone abroad on a holiday and not having done it before is an acceptable reason for travel".

Another reason to reject a tourist visa was "you plan a holiday for no particular purpose other than sightseeing".

On the use of that reason, she says: "But that's what the UK is famous for, sights worth seeing."
Click to expand...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6768405.stm


The travel industry spends a small fortune advertising the UK as a travel destination and this is the 'help' that they get.

The UK really is the home of the 'jobsworth'.
 
I wonder when we can say we're at a point when terrorism prevention efforts cause more damage (economically, socially, culturally) than terrorism itself. Slippy terrain.
 
It sounds like some hate going on by the customs people. Much like what would happen between US and Brazil or Venezuela or ESPECIALLY Cuba. Probably just thought their "sightseeing" was going to lead to immigration.
I hope "visiting friends" will get me in okay next visit. ;)
 
edesignuk said:
What? :confused:
Click to expand...

Sorry - I just haven't been too impressed with England. I suppose an arguement could be made for the Lake District, but elsewhere just didn't call to me. Some of the people there are great, no doubt, but flying somewhere to sight-see just the people is kind of creepy.:)

Now Scotland....that's the place to be.
 
It always makes me laugh that so many Scots hate the English... whereas the English couldn't care less!

Frankie Boyle said:
And to think, people said Mel Gibson couldn't do the role of William Wallace justice in Braveheart - looking at his recent antics, he's got it down to a tee - he's a drunk, violent, racist.
Click to expand...

Back on topic: I have worked in the UK civil service and nothing, but nothing surprises me anymore. That said, I suspect there are quite a high number of people who apply for a temporary visa, then 'forget' to go home - so maybe coupled with the inability to speak English, this is a good way of preventing illegal immigrants draining the country's resources.
 
CortexRock said:
It always makes me laugh that so many Scots hate the English... whereas the English couldn't care less!
Click to expand...

Isn't that like saying Black people hate White America, but White America could care less? There's a definite oppressed-oppressor directionality here.... Of course it's the Scots who hate the English.

Anyway, back on topic redux, that's interesting. Britain is a popular tourist destination for Americans. I know I would like to spend more time there. But I suppose, not if I'm not wanted. :p
 
nbs2 said:
Once Scotland gets the freedom it demands and so richly deserves, the UK won't be worth much more than a 12 hour layover...
Click to expand...
I expect you could "do" Paris in an hour, too. I mean, once you've seen the Eiffel tower, what else is there? Might as well get a postcard and save on the flight.
 
mkrishnan said:
Isn't that like saying Black people hate White America, but White America could care less? There's a definite oppressed-oppressor directionality here.... Of course it's the Scots who hate the English.

Anyway, back on topic redux, that's interesting. Britain is a popular tourist destination for Americans. I know I would like to spend more time there. But I suppose, not if I'm not wanted. :p
Click to expand...

One could argue that 'real' oppression of the Scots by the English stopped several hundred years ago, so not really a fair comparison.

As a born-bred Englishman, I have no axe to grind with the Scots - if independence is their goal, then I say good luck to them.
 
skunk said:
I expect you could "do" Paris in an hour, too. I mean, once you've seen the Eiffel tower, what else is there? Might as well get a postcard and save on the flight.
Click to expand...

Paris takes a day and a bit - one for the Louvre and the rest to see the rest of the city.

Now that Brits are pushing back on my comment, I have to admit that I have a special place in my heart for Scotland and Scottish independence. I'm sure that I will enjoy the UK more after Holyrood gets full and autonomous control and the Queen leaves the Stone of Destiny alone.
 
nbs2 said:
I'm sure that I will enjoy the UK more after Holyrood gets full and autonomous control and the Queen leaves the Stone of Destiny alone.
Click to expand...


Isn't that the title of the new Harry Potter book?

:p
 
I'm pretty sure the comment about Paris in an hour was somewhat sarcastic (my sarcasm meter has been going nuts since I've been reading threads on macrumors--I'm not sure what's wrong with it) but I think you could see "the essential touristy thing" of any city in an hour. As mentioned,Pairs-Eiffel tower. Others not mentioned London -- of course Big Ben. NYC -- Empire State Building. Madrid -- the Prado.
I can totally see why they would reject visas for sight seeing. They just didn't want them wasting their time. I'm sure they sent them back home with a picture of Big Ben at least.
 
Yes, non-english speaking people walking around the UK taking pictures of spots tourists flock to and spend money on, can be frightening. :p
 
mkrishnan said:
Anyway, back on topic redux, that's interesting. Britain is a popular tourist destination for Americans. I know I would like to spend more time there. But I suppose, not if I'm not wanted. :p
Click to expand...

I don't think a visa is required if you are traveling from the US to UK. All you need is a passport, though I may be wrong.
 
Something like that happened to my family a few years ago. We drove from Toronto to Niagara Falls (Ontario) and then crossed the border near the falls into New York State. When the customs official asked what was the purpose of our trip, my dad answered, truthfully, "sightseeing". But the way the customs guard reacted, he might as well have said "we're planning to bomb the bridge ahead". We had to open all our doors, he checked inside the vehicle, etc, etc.

After a little bit of driving around in Niagara Falls (NY), we realized why he got suspicious. :p We then proceeded to our real reason for entering the US: shopping.
 
This may seem ignorant of me, but the kind of attitude officials displayed in this case seems kind of arrogant.

I, myself haven't had as bad a experience getting visas as what's described in the article. I was at the Düsseldorf British.. Council? was it... 4 years ago... waited 6 hours in a crummy room with 40 other people during the summer without any kind of air conditioning until being interrogated, and then finally getting the visa stamped... but I went to the UK for English summer courses and what matters is that I got through.

The other issue was landing in Stansted and the border official giving me the most disgusted look when he saw I had a Romanian passport. Of course, I looked back at him, raised an eyebrow, and then I could see on his face a small hint of... [uh oh]. Luckily, the people I met after arriving were really cool.
 
I jsut got back from London

Did a May-mester class there and 3 weeks of pretty much just sightseeing the class was a bit much. Seeing Big Ben and Parliament kinda wasn't as impressive after the first week of seeing it nearly every day. Nice town though, too expensive, however great food.

Jumping into the Scottish bit, I was there for a political class and got to meet with Angus Robertson (guy who ran election for SNP in Scottish parlaiment) and Johnathan McTurland (guy who ran the Labour party campaign in Scottish parliament election). Between the two of them and everyone else of political authority I met along the way I can walk away convinced that the general concesus among the higher ups is Scotland should be an independent country now in about 10 years. However, Labour is highly against this move because it will take seats away from their party almost exclusively, specifically that of Gordon Brown. But, after hearing the whys and reasonings from both sides on whether Scotland should seceed, I can say I support it.

But what do I know, I'm just some stupid poly sci majoring Texan looking in on the situation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back