How I Got My UK Global Talent Endorsement in Three Days

A detailed guide to choosing your criteria, building strong evidence, writing a coherent personal statement, and getting recommendation letters that actually prove something

In July 2024, I applied to Tech Nation to be endorsed for the UK Global Talent Visa under the Exceptional Talent pathway. Three days later, I received an email telling me that I had been endorsed, although Tech Nation assessed me as an Exceptional Promise rather than an Exceptional Talent. I was thrilled and also surprised. The official endorsement timeline was between three and eight weeks, so receiving a decision in three days felt unreal. After the endorsement, I completed the second stage of the process and received my visa about three weeks after submitting my passport.

Since then, I have received many questions from people who also want to apply. They usually want to know what documents I submitted, who wrote my recommendation letters, how I proved my impact, what I included in my personal statement, and whether someone who is not a software engineer can qualify. The most important question, however, is the one people usually ask last: how do I know if I am ready?

This article is my attempt to answer these questions. I will explain what I submitted, how I decided which criteria to use, what I think made my evidence strong, and what I would advise someone to establish before spending time and money on an application.

Before we go into the evidence, there’s one thing I need to make clear. The real work did not happen in the four weeks I spent preparing my application for submission. The application organised evidence of work I had already done: years of building chargeback systems at Paystack, setting up processes across African markets, helping teams improve products and internal tools, scaling operations at Chowdeck, speaking at technology events, and sharing what I knew through my newsletter.

I first heard about the Global Talent route in 2021 through a video by Peace Itimi. Relocating was not on my mind at the time, so I stored the information somewhere in my head and continued with my life. As my career progressed and I gained experience across Nigeria, Ghana, and South Africa, the idea became more relevant. I wanted an opportunity to test what I had learned on a more global stage, so I returned to Peace's video, found the Tech Nation guide, and began to study the application seriously.

What this guide contains:

Section

Contents

1

Learn from my application and follow the rules

2

What Counts as Digital Technology Talent

3

Exceptional Talent or Exceptional Promise?

4

The Documents I Submitted in 2024

5

Do an Evidence Audit Before You Apply

6

Start With a Criteria Matrix

7

What Does Strong Evidence Look Like?

8

How I Built Each Evidence Document

9

How I Proved Recognition

10

How I Proved Work Beyond My Job

11

How I Proved My Commercial Contribution

12

Recommendation Letters: Choose Witnesses, Not Celebrities

13

How I Wrote My Personal Statement

14

Your CV Should Be an Evidence Map

15

Make the Whole Application Easy to Assess

16

Stage Two: Applying for the Visa

17

The Checklist I Would Use Today

18

The Most Important Lesson

Learn from my application and follow the rules

This is a record of my experience in 2024, not legal or immigration advice, and an application that looks like mine is not guaranteed to succeed. I checked the official pages again while writing this article in August 2026, but the requirements can change at any time. If you are planning to apply, treat the live Tech Nation application guide like your Bible. Then read the official GOV.UK digital technology guidance and compare both sources with the application form before you submit.

Please do not rely only on this article, a YouTube video from someone who applied three years ago, a folder from a successful applicant, or something somebody said in a WhatsApp group. These resources can help you understand how another person approached the process, but they cannot replace the live guidance. If anything I did in 2024 conflicts with the current official instructions, follow the current instructions.

One good example is the personal statement. When I applied, I submitted a personal statement of no more than 1,000 words. The GOV.UK document checklist I reviewed in August 2026 does not list a separate personal statement among the required endorsement documents. I have still explained how I wrote mine because it was part of my application and because the exercise of building a coherent story remains useful, but you must confirm what your application requires when you apply.

What Counts as Digital Technology Talent

The digital technology route is for people who can show that they are already leaders, or have the potential to become leaders, in the sector. It is not only for software engineers. Technical applicants may include developers, engineers, data scientists, designers, and cybersecurity experts, while business applicants may include people with commercial, product, investment, growth, or operations expertise in product-led technology companies.

I applied as a business applicant. My background was in Customer Success and Operations, and I showed that I had used those skills inside product-led digital technology companies to improve products, reduce losses, grow revenue, build systems, and scale operations across markets. The current list of technical and business skills covered by Tech Nation includes business profiles such as heads of operations, experienced product managers, commercial leads, and people who have helped expand significant product-led digital businesses.

That distinction is important because having a technology company on your CV does not automatically prove exceptional ability. The impact of your work is an important factor. You must show what you personally did, why it mattered, and how someone can verify the result.

The process normally has two separate stages. You first apply for an endorsement, and the Home Office sends a digital technology application to Tech Nation for assessment. If you are endorsed, you then make the visa application to the Home Office. An endorsement is not the visa itself, and the official endorsement page explains the deadline for using an endorsement and the relationship between both applications.

One reason the route is attractive is its flexibility. You do not need a job offer before applying, and successful visa holders can work as employees, be self-employed, or run companies, subject to the conditions of the visa. The route therefore gives people who qualify more freedom than a visa tied to one employer.

Exceptional Talent or Exceptional Promise?

There are two pathways. Exceptional Talent is for people who are already recognised as leaders in digital technology, while Exceptional Promise is for people at an earlier stage of their technology careers who can demonstrate the potential to become leaders. The difference lies in career stage, relevant technology experience, level of recognition, and strength of evidence.

The Tech Nation guide describes Exceptional Talent as the pathway for people who are well established in their careers and have a strong track record, while Exceptional Promise is generally aimed at people who are earlier in their technology careers. These descriptions are helpful, but you should read the exact eligibility wording that applies when you are preparing your application rather than making a decision based on years of experience alone.

I applied for Exceptional Talent, but Tech Nation endorsed me as an Exceptional Promise. That experience taught me that the assessor will make an independent decision about the pathway your evidence supports. It also taught me that Exceptional Promise is not a consolation prize. You still need a strong record of achievement and clear evidence that you are on a leadership trajectory.

The distinction also has practical consequences. Under the rules I reviewed for this update, the digital technology Exceptional Talent route has a shorter qualifying period for settlement than Exceptional Promise. Confirm the rules that apply to you on the official Global Talent overview, and do not choose Promise because you assume it is an easy route. There is no easy route here; there is only the route your career can honestly support.

The Documents I Submitted in 2024

When I applied, my endorsement pack included:

1. My CV.
2. A personal statement of no more than 1,000 words.
3. Three recommendation letters.
4. The CVs of the three people who recommended me.
5. Supporting documents proving that I met the mandatory criterion and two optional criteria.
6. Proof of my position as a senior executive at a technology business.

The current GOV.UK endorsement document checklist requires a CV, three recommendation letters, proof of your connection to a technology business if you have been a founder or senior executive within the relevant period, and no more than ten documents proving that you meet the eligibility criteria. It also sets the page limits and explains how the evidence must be distributed across the criteria. Your CV and the three main recommendation letters do not count as part of the ten evidence documents.

When I applied, each evidence document could be no more than three A4 pages. My CV was two pages, and my recommendation letters were generally two or three pages, excluding supporting credentials or signing records. The page limits forced me to be disciplined because I could not include every detail of every project. Each evidence document needed to prove one clear claim against one clear criterion.

Do an Evidence Audit Before You Apply

Before you begin designing documents, ask yourself the uncomfortable question: do I already have the evidence? This is not an application you should approach by opening a blank document and searching for impressive words. Strong writing cannot replace a missing track record.

Before applying, I would want to answer yes to most of the following questions:

• Have I worked in a product-led digital technology company, not merely a company that uses technology?
• Can I show important outcomes from my work within the relevant period?
• Can I quantify those outcomes through revenue, savings, growth, adoption, users, markets, jobs, transactions, or another meaningful measure?
• Can a credible third party verify the claims I am making?
• Have I contributed beyond the ordinary requirements of my job?
• Can I show recognition outside my immediate team or employer?
• Do I have at least three established technology leaders who have known my work for at least a year and can discuss it in detail?
• Can I build a strong case for the main recognition requirement and two additional criteria without recycling the same document?
• Does my evidence tell one consistent story about my field, impact, and leadership potential?

If the honest answer to most of these questions is no, waiting may be wiser than rushing. Spend time building the record by leading a meaningful project, tracking its results, and making sure your contribution can be verified. Think about how you can use the skills and experience you’re accumulating to give back to society. It could be through speaking at credible events, contributing to reputable journals or publications or any other means that resonates with you.

The best time to collect evidence is while you are doing the work. Keep a log of your wins, save the original analytics, record dates and URLs, and ask for confirmation letters while the people and information are still available. Reconstructing a major project two years later is far more difficult, especially after dashboards have changed or former managers have moved on.

Start With a Criteria Matrix

In 2024, I needed to prove the mandatory recognition criterion and two optional criteria. The mandatory requirement was to show that I had been recognised as a leading talent in digital technology during the previous five years. The optional criteria covered areas such as innovation in a product-led digital technology business, recognition for work outside your occupation that advances the field, significant technical or commercial contributions, and relevant academic contributions.

I chose to prove recognition for work beyond my normal occupation and significant commercial contributions as a senior employee of product-led digital technology companies. This was a deliberate decision. I did not choose the criteria I admired most; I chose the criteria for which I had the strongest and most verifiable evidence.

My evidence matrix looked roughly like this:

Area I needed to prove

Evidence I used

Recognition as a leading or potential talent

A three-year compensation summary benchmarked against the market; proof of above-market compensation; evidence that respected global platforms had featured my work

Work beyond my occupation

Evidence of speaking at technology and business events; a validation letter from a technology community leader; evidence of my newsletter, its content, and its audience

Significant commercial contribution

A three-page document proving my senior role and impact at Chowdeck; a separate letter from a respected technology leader validating my contribution

The current checklist requires at least two documents showing that you are recognised as a leader or potential leader, as well as at least two documents for each of two additional criteria. You cannot use the same document for more than one criterion. Although you may submit up to ten evidence documents, ten is a maximum rather than a target. Six strong and distinct documents are better than ten weak or repetitive ones.

What Does Strong Evidence Look Like?

There is a hierarchy to evidence. An independent and verifiable source is usually stronger than a claim you wrote about yourself. An official company letter that identifies your contribution is stronger than an unexplained screenshot, while a dashboard with dates, labels, and context is stronger than a number floating in a paragraph. In the same way, a public article that names you and explains your work is stronger than a general article about your employer.

Your narrative still matters because it helps the assessor understand what the evidence means, but the narrative is the glue rather than the proof. For each major achievement, I tried to answer five questions: what was the problem, what did I personally do, why was my contribution beyond ordinary execution, what changed because of my work, and how could an assessor verify the result?

At Chowdeck, for example, saying that I “led rider operations” would have been too vague. My evidence showed that the rider network grew from about 80 riders to more than 5,000 in 18 months and connected that expansion to an increase in delivery capacity from about 800 daily deliveries to more than 20,000. It also showed monthly gross merchandise value growing by more than 8,000% and explained how I reduced the cost of recruiting and onboarding riders by more than 80%.

I supported this narrative with data, charts, screenshots, proof of my role, public reporting about the business, and a detailed letter from the company. This gave the assessor something concrete to evaluate. Writing “I made a significant contribution to company growth” would only have asked the assessor to trust my adjective.

How I Built Each Evidence Document

My evidence documents were simple PDFs, not design portfolios that needed complicated graphics. They were simple, readable and easy to assess. A typical document had a clear title, a short opening paragraph explaining what it proved, a first-person account of my contribution, quantifiable results, and screenshots or extracts from independent sources. I also added captions explaining the relevance of each visual, included dates and URLs where appropriate, and ended with a short paragraph connecting the evidence to the criterion.

My three-page Chowdeck document is a useful example. The first page established that I was a member of the executive team and led Rider Operations, including proof that I appeared on the company's website and an explanation of the scale of the operation I led. The second page showed growth and commercial results through charts and company metrics, while the third page added independent media coverage and further proof of my relationship with the company. The document had one job: make my role and impact easy to understand.

A Practical Three-Page Structure

If the current guide still allows three pages for each evidence item when you apply, I would use the following structure:

1. Page one: the claim. State the criterion, achievement, and your role. Include the clearest piece of proof early so the assessor understands the point of the document before getting into the details.
2. Page two: the impact. Show the results using a chart, analytics screenshot, official letter, product image, or another appropriate source. Explain what every visual shows and why it matters.
3. Page three: independent verification. Add press coverage, an employer confirmation, a public record, event material, or another source that corroborates the claim. End by explaining why the complete document satisfies the criterion.

Do not fill three pages with tiny screenshots that nobody can read, and do not paste ten links into a document expecting the assessor to conduct an investigation for you. If you rely on webpage content, include the relevant content in the evidence and make the source visible. The current Home Office caseworker guidance says that webpage evidence should be submitted as a scanned copy that clearly shows the hyperlink rather than as a link on its own.

How I Proved Recognition

Recognition can be difficult to prove because people often confuse doing good work with being recognised for good work. They are related, but they are not the same. For this part of my application, I used evidence of above-market compensation, a compensation history covering several years, and evidence that global platforms had invited me to share my work.

One of those platforms was Founders Connect, where I discussed the systems and strategies behind Chowdeck's growth. At the time I prepared my application, the interview had been viewed more than 33,000 times. I also included credible articles about Chowdeck's rider operations and growth. The compensation evidence helped show how employers valued my work, while the platform features and media coverage showed that the work had attracted attention outside my employer.

Neither type of evidence should be treated as magic. A high salary does not explain what you contributed, and a media mention that is really a paid advert may not prove meaningful recognition. In the same way, a feature about your company that never identifies your role may show that the company is impressive without proving anything about you. Every item should be accompanied by a clear explanation of what it says about your work.

How I Proved Work Beyond My Job

The phrase “beyond your occupation” is important because doing your assigned job very well is not the same as advancing the wider technology community outside your employment. For this criterion, I showed that I had spoken to MBA students at Henley Business School Africa about the evolution of African fintech, spoken to a technology community of more than 300 people about building a career in Customer Operations, and shared practical career knowledge through my newsletter, First Job. I also showed the audience I had built across several countries and the kind of material I had published to help people enter technology and grow in their careers.

I included a criterion-specific validation letter from the founder of the community that invited me to speak. The letter explained how the writer knew me, identified the events and audiences, and confirmed the substance of my contribution. This was different from one of my three main recommendation letters. The three required letters supported my overall application, while this separate letter had a narrower purpose: verifying a particular contribution. Because I used it as evidence, it occupied one of my permitted evidence slots.

Community activity must also have substance. One social media post is not a mentoring programme, attending an event is not the same as speaking at it, and being one of hundreds of names on a membership list is not recognition. Explain what you did, who benefited, the scale of the contribution, when it happened, and how it advanced the field.

How I Proved My Commercial Contribution

For the significant commercial contribution criterion, I focused on the relationship between my work and the company's outcomes. I did not simply describe my responsibilities as Rider Operations Lead; I explained the problems the business faced, the systems I built, the teams and processes I led, and the measurable changes that followed. The evidence connected my work to the growth of the rider fleet, delivery capacity, revenue, cost savings, and the company's ability to serve more customers.

A company's success is not automatically your success, even when you were part of the team. If your employer grew from one million to ten million users, you still need to explain the part you played, show that your contribution was significant, and provide evidence that somebody with direct knowledge can verify it. The assessor needs to understand the line between the company's achievement and your own work.

Recommendation Letters: Choose Witnesses, Not Celebrities

The recommendation letters are among the most important parts of the application. Mine came from the co-founder and CEO of Chowdeck, who had known my work at both Paystack and Chowdeck; a former manager at Paystack who had directly supervised me; and a senior Customer Success leader at Paystack who had worked with me for several years. They were credible people, but credibility was not the only reason I chose them. They had personally seen the work they were writing about.

A famous founder who met you once at a conference may write a flattering paragraph, but a former manager who can explain the problem you solved, the product you influenced, and the money you saved may write a far more persuasive letter. Choose people who have enough standing in the technology industry to be taken seriously and enough direct knowledge of your work to provide specific examples.

Under the current GOV.UK guidance, each recommender must be an established expert in digital technology and must have known your work for at least 12 months. Each letter should give different examples of your achievements, explain how the writer knows you, show why you are a leader or potential leader, describe how you would benefit from living in the UK, explain how the UK technology sector would benefit from you, and discuss your plans for future work.

The letters must also follow the current formatting requirements. At the time of this update, they must be written specifically for the Global Talent application, typed and dated, signed, and no more than three single sides of A4 excluding the author's credentials and contact details. They should include the relevant contact and organisational information and be accompanied by the author's CV or another form of credentials accepted by the endorsing body. Please read the live recommendation-letter requirements before sending instructions to your recommenders.

I gave my recommenders about three weeks because I wanted them to have enough time to think and write. Do not send somebody a message on Friday and ask for a careful letter by Monday. Send the person the current requirements, your CV, your career plan, and an accurate list of projects they personally observed. You can remind them of dates and metrics to make the administrative work easier, but the letter should still reflect their experience of working with you.

The three letters should not read like versions of the same template. If they use the same sentences, examples, and structure, they may look manufactured. A strong set of letters gives the assessor three different views of the same career, with each writer adding details that only someone in their position would know. The best letters do not merely say you are excellent; they show the assessor why.

How I Wrote My Personal Statement

When I applied, the personal statement had a limit of 1,000 words, and I treated it as the spine of the application. My CV listed my career, my evidence documents proved individual claims, and my recommendation letters showed how respected people understood my work. The personal statement explained how all these pieces belonged to one story.

Mine began with the curiosity that drew me towards technology and followed my journey from studying History and Strategic Studies at the University of Lagos to working at Paystack, Stitch, and Chowdeck. Across these roles, I had repeatedly learned to solve the same broad problem: helping technology businesses build systems, serve customers, and scale across African markets. Framing the statement around this consistent thread made it easier to explain why my experiences belonged together.

I then connected that record to a future in the UK. I explained why I was interested in the UK's fintech and food-tech sectors, the kind of Operations and Customer Success roles I planned to pursue, my ambition to grow into senior operating leadership and eventually build a technology company, where I intended to live, and the experience I would contribute to the UK ecosystem. The plan was specific enough to be credible and closely related to the work I had already done.

If a personal statement or equivalent narrative is required when you apply, it should answer questions such as:

• Who are you beyond your current job title?
• What consistent problem have you learned to solve?
• Which achievements provide the strongest proof of this ability?
• Why does your record show leadership or the potential for leadership?
• Why is the UK the logical next environment for your work?
• What exactly do you plan to do there?
• Which sectors, companies, communities, or problems are relevant to your plan?
• What knowledge or perspective will you contribute to the UK technology ecosystem?

Saying that “the UK has a vibrant technology ecosystem” is not a plan. Name the intersection between your experience and the opportunity you want to pursue. My experience covered African fintech, food-tech, multi-market operations, Customer Success, and rapidly scaling teams, so my UK plan focused on the same areas. That continuity made the story believable.

This is also where inconsistency can damage an otherwise strong application. If your CV says you joined a company in 2020 but your statement says 2022, correct it. If a recommendation letter credits you with a result that your evidence attributes to someone else, resolve the discrepancy. If you describe yourself as a product leader in one place but none of your evidence mentions product work, the story will feel manufactured.

My advice is to organise your evidence before writing the personal statement. Once you can see your strongest achievements, the recurring problems you have solved, and the way other people describe your work, the most credible story usually becomes clearer. Even if the live application does not request a separate personal statement, doing this exercise will help you make your CV, recommendation letters, and evidence documents consistent.

Your CV Should Be an Evidence Map

My application CV was two pages and included my career history, education, and relevant publications. More importantly, the work-experience bullets focused on outcomes rather than generic responsibilities. I wrote about scaling a rider network, reducing recruitment costs, maintaining delivery performance as volume grew, preventing substantial chargeback losses, building help-centre resources used by thousands of businesses, and contributing to product improvements with Engineering and Product teams.

The current guidance allows a typed CV of up to three sides of A4 and asks applicants to include their career and relevant publication history. I would still advise keeping it as concise as possible. A longer CV is not automatically a stronger CV, especially when important achievements are buried beneath routine responsibilities.

Think of your CV as an evidence map. The assessor should be able to see a major claim on the CV and know where to find deeper proof in your evidence pack. Do not use the CV to introduce impressive achievements that appear nowhere else in the application, and make sure the dates, job titles, and numbers are consistent with the rest of your documents.

Make the Whole Application Easy to Assess

An assessor should not have to solve a puzzle to understand your career. I used clear filenames, readable layouts, short explanations, captions, dates, and visible sources. I converted the final documents to PDF and checked every page to make sure screenshots were readable, charts had enough context, numbers matched, letters were signed, and all the files stayed within the required limits.

My final review covered questions like these:

• Is every screenshot readable at normal size?
• Does every chart have enough context to understand it?
• Are the source, date, and URL visible where they need to be?
• Does each document clearly identify the criterion it supports?
• Are confidential details redacted without destroying the usefulness of the proof?
• Do numbers match across my CV, statement, letters, and evidence?
• Are all letters signed and dated, with the recommenders' credentials included?
• Have I stayed within every word, page, document, and file-size limit?
• Do all hyperlinks work?
• Have I removed repetition?

My friend Ope Adedeji helped me proofread the application, and having another thoughtful person review the complete pack was invaluable. However, do not ask your reviewer only whether the application is “good.” Ask what they think your strongest claim is, which achievement is confusing, where they doubt that you personally caused a result, which document feels repetitive, and what claim needs better proof. If your reviewer cannot explain your story after reading the application, the assessor may struggle too.

Stage Two: Applying for the Visa

After I received the endorsement, I applied for the visa itself. As a Nigerian applicant in 2024, I needed a valid international passport and a recent tuberculosis test from a UK Home Office-approved centre. I completed the remaining application and biometric requirements, submitted my passport, and received confirmation roughly three weeks later that the visa had been granted and my passport was ready for collection.

That was my process in 2024, and your process may be different. Requirements can vary depending on your nationality, where you apply from, whether you are switching inside the UK, and whether you have received a relevant scholarship. The document and eVisa process can also change, so use the current Stage Two document guidance and the instructions in your application account. Receiving an endorsement does not automatically grant the visa because the Home Office still assesses the visa application.

The Checklist I Would Use Today

If I were preparing another application, this is the checklist I would use before submitting.

Eligibility

• I have read the current GOV.UK and Tech Nation guidance in full.
• My role and work fit the digital technology route.
• My relevant experience is inside product-led digital technology companies where the criterion requires it.
• I have chosen Talent or Promise based on evidence rather than ego.
• My most important achievements fall within the relevant period.

Criteria and Evidence

• I have copied the exact current criteria into an evidence matrix.
• I have at least two strong documents for the main recognition requirement.
• I have at least two strong documents for each of two additional criteria.
• I have not reused one document for more than one criterion.
• I have not exceeded the maximum number of evidence documents.
• Each document stays within the current page limit.
• Each claim identifies my personal contribution and quantifies the important results.
• Each major claim is independently verifiable where possible.
• Screenshots show dates, sources, and URLs where required.
• Confidential information is properly redacted.

Recommendation Letters

• I have three different established experts who know my work well.
• Each person has known my work for at least 12 months.
• Each letter was written specifically for this application.
• The letters contain different and detailed examples.
• The letters explain my UK contribution and future plans.
• Every letter is typed, dated, signed, and within the current page limit.
• The required organisational and contact details are included.
• Each recommender's CV or other accepted proof of credentials is included.

Story and Presentation

• My CV prioritises relevant achievements and publications.
• If the current application requires a personal statement, it answers every prompt and stays within the word limit.
• My CV, statement, letters, and evidence tell the same story.
• Dates, job titles, and numbers are consistent everywhere.
• Every page is readable and every file has a clear name.
• A careful person has proofread the complete pack.

Visa Stage

• I understand that endorsement and the visa are separate applications.
• I have checked the current deadline for using my endorsement.
• I have checked the passport, tuberculosis, translation, biometric, fee, and healthcare-surcharge requirements for my circumstances.
• I am following the current Home Office instructions rather than relying on a 2024 checklist.

The Most Important Lesson

When I graduated from the University of Lagos with a degree in History and Strategic Studies, I did not imagine that I would one day be endorsed under a visa route for leaders and potential leaders in digital technology. My first proper role in tech was in Customer Support. Over time, however, I learned how to own difficult problems, work with technical teams, build systems, use data, improve products, scale operations, and share what I knew. Those choices created the record that I eventually presented to Tech Nation.

The Global Talent application is an evidence exercise. The writing matters because it helps the assessor see the pattern; presentation matters because it makes the proof easy to understand; and the recommendation letters matter because credible people can validate the work. The foundation, however, is still the work itself.

If you want to apply in the future, start building and documenting the record now. Track the outcomes of your work, keep the evidence, and develop relationships with respected people who can speak honestly about your contribution. When the record is strong enough, organise it into one clear and coherent story, then allow the evidence to support what you are saying.

If you are considering the Global Talent route, what part of the application are you finding most difficult: choosing your criteria, gathering evidence, finding recommenders, or writing your story?

Share this with someone whose work is stronger than their ability to explain it.

This article shares my personal experience and general information only. It is not immigration advice. If you need advice about your circumstances, speak to a properly regulated UK immigration adviser or solicitor.