A recent evaluation brings to light significant concerns regarding changes in the application process for ECAA Turkish Businessperson visa extensions and indefinite leave to remain under the Ankara Agreement. Authored by Tamer Ulay, the assessment reveals that since the transfer of the unit managing these cases from Sheffield to Liverpool in November 2025, applicants have experienced prolonged waiting periods and an increase in refusals based on technicalities. Although the official rules have not been explicitly altered, there seems to be a stricter, more suspicious application of these rules, with refusals increasingly focused on aspects like billing procedures, bank payment references, ICO registration, website appearances, and administrative errors in business documents. This scrutiny contrasts with the core intention of the Ankara Agreement, which should center around whether an applicant has genuinely established and is actively running a sustainable business in the UK.
In his analysis, Ulay emphasizes that the primary concern in Ankara Agreement applications should be whether the business is genuinely operational and sustainable. He highlights that administrative or technical issues, often seen in small businesses, should not automatically imply the business lacks legitimacy. Applicants who have consistently received extensions, paid taxes, and supported their families through their businesses should not be judged solely on a fault-finding basis. The article underscores that small enterprises might not have perfect invoicing systems, comprehensive websites, or flawless bank statements. While these factors warrant examination, treating them as automatic grounds for rejection misaligns with the realities of business life.
The extended processing times for these applications also impose significant stress on applicants and their families, influencing business planning, travel, children’s education, family dynamics, and financial decisions. The evaluation suggests that if similar refusal grounds persist across multiple cases, it might indicate a structural change in practice rather than isolated incidents. This could potentially open up discussions on broader procedural shifts.
It is crucial to note that the article does not advocate for protecting fraudulent applications or shell companies. Instead, it stresses that legitimate business owners should not be unfairly grouped with fraudulent applicants due to mere technical or administrative oversights. Applicants are advised to meticulously prepare their documents, be aware of common refusal grounds, seek professional legal guidance, and adopt a strategic approach when necessary.
The publication, VisaFree World, which focuses on immigration, visas, and settlement programs, particularly within the UK and EU, reminds readers that each case should be evaluated on its own merits. The content provided, while informative, does not serve as personal legal advice, urging individuals to consult professional legal services for guidance tailored to their specific circumstances.