The situation
The organisation first learned of the revocation when a public-sector body contacted it after receiving notification from UK Visas and Immigration. Until that call, the provider believed its sponsor licence remained active.
It employed a small number of sponsored workers and had contractual and regulatory responsibilities as a care provider. Discovering the decision through another organisation created immediate uncertainty about its workforce and operations.
After contacting the Home Office, the provider was told that its licence had been revoked and its Sponsor Management System access terminated. It then made repeated requests for the revocation notice to establish the reasons for the decision.
The challenge
The organisation had appointed an external immigration technology and services provider with Level 1 User access. The client understood that the provider would assist with sponsor management and identify immigration compliance matters requiring attention.
Before revocation, the Home Office had requested information about a sponsored worker’s salary. That request went to the external provider, which alerted the organisation. A response was submitted within the deadline, and the revocation decision acknowledged its receipt.
However, the decision also referred to further correspondence that the client said it had never seen. We needed to establish where those communications had been sent, who had received them and what had been passed to the organisation.
Our approach
Our investigation focused on reconstructing the sequence of correspondence leading to sponsor licence revocation.
The decision notice revealed a discrepancy concerning the Authorising Officer’s email address. The address recorded by the Home Office differed from the one the organisation understood should have been used. That required investigation alongside the correspondence handled through the external provider.
We examined the distinction between the initial salary enquiry, which the organisation knew about and had answered, and the subsequent requests referred to in the decision. The client’s account needed to be tested against the available records to establish what had been sent, received and communicated at each stage.
Historic system evidence was also relevant. The organisation had retained records showing when the third-party integration had been established. Some information previously visible through the provider’s platform was no longer displayed when the client investigated the revocation, making the retained records particularly valuable to the chronology.
The investigation needed to account for the contact details held by the Home Office, communications received by the external Level 1 User and information reaching the sponsor itself. Establishing those facts was necessary to assess the significance of the missing correspondence.
Value delivered
Our work identified the communications and contact-data questions requiring investigation, including the email address discrepancy and the further correspondence referred to in the revocation decision.
The investigation provided a structure for testing the client’s account against documentary and system records. It distinguished the request the organisation had answered from the later communications it said had never reached it.
That factual reconstruction was necessary to assess the circumstances leading to the decision and advise on the organisation’s position.
Sponsor licence revocation support
DavidsonMorris advises employers investigating sponsor licence revocation decisions, including disputed correspondence, sponsor management records and third-party involvement. We can assess the evidence and advise on the available options for challenging revocation.
Speak to our team about a sponsor licence revocation →
