I have applied recently for a general visitor visa to the UK to spend 10 days during Christmas with my British unmarried partner and it has been turned down.
The Entry Clearance Officer stated on his refusal notice the following:
I note that you have never previously travelled to the UK or any country with similar immigration requirements and you therefore do not have a history of travel and compliance to consider.
You have submitted an employment letter to confirm your occupation in KSA but I am required to also assess your personal, domestic and economic circumstances in determining whether you are genuine visitor travelling to the UK for the period and purpose you state.
You claim an income of SAR …….. per month which equal …….. GBP and from the evidence submitted this appears to be your sole source of income.
I note that this monthly income is reflected on your bank statements. However, the bank statement you have presented show a recent large deposit that are in excess of your stated income and inconsistent with the account history. You haven’t provided evidence toward the origin of this recent deposit and in the absence of reasonable evidence I am not satisfied that these bank statements accurately reflect your personal circumstances.
In view of the above, I am not satisfied you have demonstrated that your circumstances are as you claim and therefore I am not satisfied that you’re travelling to the UK for the period and purpose you stated. 41(i)and(ii).
Its true that I have deposited that sum of money right before I apply and it was a commission I received from work earlier this month.
So, could you please give me your advice on the above as I am planning to apply again soon. and how to avoid my application being refused again?
Applicants who fear that their bank statements may betray a weak financial position will sometimes resort to a ‘parking’ strategy. This strategy involves having a relative or other trusted party placing a large sum of money in the applicant’s account temporarily so that the applicant’s bank statements look better. It’s a popular strategy, but when it fails, the application is refused and the applicant’s credibility is damaged.
It is the applicant’s responsibility to show that funds available for the visit are his and available to him for the visit. This is stated in
Paragraph 41 of the rules (see update below).
In your case it looks like the ECO decided you wanted to appear more prosperous than you are, so you found someone to park money in your account. Moreover, he was unable to use a previous history to help determine if you are a reliable and compliant person.
Irregular bank transactions need to be carefully documented with paperwork that shows  who,  what,  how,  when, and most importantly  why. If you recently sold a house for example, they would want to see the complete transaction history, up to and possibly including the bank statement of the counterpart.
The only remedy available is to make a fresh application. You need to prepare the application knowing that your credibility has been damaged and they will apply more scrutiny and caution when they make their decision.
Owing to a rule change in 2015, the rule is now stated in Appendix V Paragraph 4.2 subparagraph e
must have sufficient funds to cover all reasonable costs in relation
to their visit without working or accessing public funds. This
includes the cost of the return or onward journey, any costs relating
to dependants, and the cost of planned activities such as private
The ways that an applicant can meet the rules and provide the appropriate evidence is given in Visitor: supporting documents guide