Nejat Immigration's Guide to the UK Child Student Visa and Admissions
Parya Kazemi, International Educational Consultant at Nejat Immigration Ltd., will provide detailed insights into the UK Child Student Visa. With extensive experience assisting numerous families in securing placements for their children within the UK's prestigious educational system, we understand that this process represents a significant milestone—filled with hope, anticipation, and understandable concerns. One of the most frequently asked questions we receive at Nejat Immigration Ltd. is: How can my child study in the UK legally, and am I eligible to accompany them?
Alright, let's put it all together. This is a guide to families who would like to apply for the UK Child Student Visa, which is the primary method of immigration for children between the ages of 4 and 17 who attend independent schools in the United Kingdom.
Gaining admission to a UK independent school involves careful planning, preparation, and an understanding of the application process. Here's a step-by-step overview to help you navigate this journey:
1.1.Research & School Selection
Identify schools that align with your child's academic strengths, interests, and extracurricular preferences. Consider factors such as location, curriculum (e.g., GCSEs, A-Levels, IB), facilities, and pastoral care.
Nejat Immigration Ltd proudly recommend and represent two of the UK's most prestigious and well-regarded British schools: Chase Grammar School and Abbotsholme School.
1.2.Check Entry Requirements & Deadlines
Most schools have specific entry points (e.g., ages 7+, 11+, 13+, 16+). Some require entrance exams
Application deadlines vary—top schools often require submissions 12 months in advance.
13.Prepare for Assessments & Interviews
Entrance Exams: Many schools test English, Maths, and Reasoning. Some may require additional subject tests.
Interviews: Assessed on communication skills, confidence, and academic potential.
At Nejat Immigration Ltd, we maintain dedicated specialist departments to ensure excellence in every aspect of your UK education journey with dual-department approach.
1.Why our dual-department approach benefits you?
At Nejat Immigration Ltd, we take pride in offering comprehensive, professional support for families navigating the UK independent school admissions process and associated visa requirements. Our structured approach divides these critical services between two dedicated departments, each led by qualified experts in their respective fields.
2.1.School Admissions Department
Under the leadership of myself, Parya Kazemi, International Education Consultant, our School Admissions Department at Nejat Immigration Ltd provides end-to-end guidance for securing placements in the UK's most prestigious independent institutions. We begin by developing a personalized school selection strategy tailored to each student's academic profile, aspirations, and extracurricular interests. Our services extend to thorough preparation for entrance examinations, including targeted coaching for common assessments such as the school-specific tests. Recognizing the competitive nature of admissions, we offer specialized interview preparation training through mock sessions designed to build confidence and refine presentation skills.
Additionally, we provide expert assistance with scholarship applications, helping families navigate financial aid opportunities. From initial research to final placement, we oversee the entire process, including
coordination of the Confirmation of Acceptance for Studies (CAS) – a critical document for international students requiring a visa.
2.2.Visa & Immigration Department
Our Visa & Immigration Department operates under the supervision of Mr. Mohammad Amin Nejat, an OISC-accredited immigration lawyer regulated by the United Kingdom Immigration Advice Authority (IAA) with extensive expertise in UK related visas. This department manages all aspects of the Child Student Visa application process, ensuring full compliance with UK Visas and Immigration (UKVI) regulations. Services include meticulous preparation of financial evidence, verification of supporting documents, and legal representation for complex cases.
For families requiring additional support, we also process Dependent Visas for parents accompanying their under 12-years old children to the UK. Every application benefits from our rigorous attention to detail and in-depth knowledge of current immigration policies, significantly improving the likelihood of successful outcomes.
3.Who Can Apply for a UK Child Student Visa?
UK Child Student Visa is for children from 4 to 17 years old who have been accepted by an independent (private) school approved by UKVI. Note that the visa does not apply to state schools, academies, or further education colleges.
Your child must meet the following requirements to be qualified:
The financial requirement is determined largely by where and how your child will live. The UK Home Office wants to make sure your child can live safely and affordably.
You must show that you will pay course and boarding fees in advance for a full study year. If your child is with a parent (Parent of a Child Student visa holder):
£1,560/month (maximum 9 months) for one parent and one child.
and you will have to add on another £625/month for any further children.
If your child is with a private foster carer or a relative: £570/month (maximum 9 months). If your child is 16 or 17 and living away from home:
£1,334 a month if living and studying in London.
£1,023 a month if living and studying elsewhere.
The funds required must be held for a minimum of 28 consecutive days, and the bank statement must be within 31 days of your application date.
5.When and How to Apply
If you are not within the UK, you can apply no more than 6 months before your course starts. Decision time is approximately 3 weeks.
If you are within the UK, you must apply no more than 3 months before your course begins. Decision time is approximately 8 weeks
The visa application fee is currently £524, and you'll also pay the Immigration Health Surcharge, which grants access to the UK's National Health Service during your child's stay. You can pay £1,000 extra for super priority service at some visa centres to get your decisions in 2 working days.
6.Can Parents Travel with the Child?
Yes, but only one parent is allowed to apply for the Parent of a Child Student visa, and only if The child is under 12.
The child is attending an independent school.
The parent can financially support both of them (typically £1,560/month for up to 9 months). Remember this visa does not allow the parent to work or bring a spouse or other children to the UK, unless they apply separately.
6.1.Documents You'll Need Valid passport or travel document. CAS number from the school.
Parental consent letter (includes consent to travel, live, and study). Proof of funds (bank statements or financial sponsor letter).
Tuberculosis test certificate (if required in your country). Birth certificate or guardianship document.
Our Role at Nejat Immigration Ltd
At Nejat Immigration, we don't just submit applications, we become part of your family's journey. Here's what we do:
Peace of Mind, Guaranteed!
At Nejat Immigration Ltd we know what's at risk. That is why we offer our exclusive Golden Package: if your child's application is unsuccessful even after following all guidance and instructions, we will repay your service charge. All funds are securely stored in a Designated Client Account, only paid out on reaching key milestones, so you can be certain of transparency and trust.
Last Thoughts from Me
Putting your child out of your way with their education abroad is not just about immigration, it's a question of possibility. I understand the emotions involved in putting your child's future in someone else's hands, another nation. That is why I work so intimately with each family, not as a consultant but as a human being who cares.
If you're considering a UK education for your child and want to ensure the immigration side is handled with empathy and precision, I'd love to help. Visit our website or get in touch, your child's future might just begin with a conversation.
Media Contact
Company Name: Nejat Immigration Ltd
Contact Person: Andrew Jackson
Email: Send Email
City: London
Country: United Kingdom
Website: https://www.nejat.uk/
Press Release Distributed by ABNewswire.com
To view the original version on ABNewswire visit: Nejat Immigration's Guide to the UK Child Student Visa and Admissions
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
44 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Why the BBC thinks it can get Labour to give it more funding
Tim Davie struck a gloomy tone when discussing the BBC's finances on Tuesday, as he renewed calls for extra funding. 'I want proper investment and not begrudging, grinding cuts to the BBC, which you've had in the last 10 years, which have just not helped,' the director general said. The timing of his comments was key. Davie is currently locked in talks with ministers ahead of the BBC's Charter renewal in 2027, as he fights for the future of the licence fee. Bosses in W1A acknowledge that the funding model requires reform in the modern media age. But how this will affect the BBC's stretched finances is a critical question as it continues to lose viewers at an alarming rate. The licence fee has existed in some guise since the BBC's launch in 1922, when the government decided the new broadcaster should be publicly funded. This, the corporation says, allows its UK output to remain 'free of advertisements and independent of shareholder and political interest'. While the BBC was initially limited to radio services, the first combined radio and TV licence was issued in 1946 for £2. Fast-forward to the 21st century and the BBC has transformed from a fledgling broadcaster into a public service behemoth. Income from the licence fee stood at £3.7bn last year, a significant chunk of the UK's entertainment and media market, which is valued at around £100bn by PwC. However, this scale does not tell the full story. With the emergence of streaming rivals such as Netflix and Disney, as well as social media platforms such as YouTube and TikTok, the BBC is facing an identity crisis. While the public service broadcaster continues to dominate the UK media space – around 86pc of adults consume its services each week, according to the latest Ofcom figures – it is losing ground. This is particularly acute among 16 to 24-year-olds, who spend just 5pc of their in-home video time with the BBC, compared to the 23pc for over-35s. Waning interest has meant lower income as viewers vote with their feet. The number of households paying the licence fee dropped to 23.9m last year – a 500,000 fall that sucked £80m from the BBC's budget. The figure is 2.3m lower than the peak of 26.2m between 2017 and 2019. Cost is likely to be a factor. At £174.50 per year, the licence fee comes in at around £14.50 a month. That compares to £5.99 a month for Netflix's ad tier, or £12.99 for its standard ad-free service. Disney charges £4.99 with ads and £8.99 without. While the BBC argues it offers good value for money given the breadth of its service, this is unlikely to win over apathetic youngsters who consider Auntie irrelevant. The fall in licence fee payers is not the only driving force behind the BBC's squeezed finances, however. Over the last 15 years, repeated government interventions have taken their toll. In 2010, George Osborne announced the licence fee would be frozen for seven years at £145.50. Nadine Dorries, the former culture secretary, then froze the levy again in 2022, even as inflation surged. The fee will now increase in line with inflation until the end of the Charter in 2027, but only after another Tory culture secretary, Lucy Frazer, stepped in to prevent a 9pc – or £15 – rise amid concerns it would fuel the cost of living crisis. Adding further strain to the budget, the government in 2015 forced the BBC to take over the cost of providing free licence fees to the over-75s, while it also handed over the main burden of funding the World Service. Analysis shows that government interference, coupled with a decline in licence fee payers, amounts to a real-terms decrease of around 30pc – or £1.4bn – in the broadcaster's domestic funding over the last 15 years. The question, then, is how to plug the gap. Davie has been wielding the axe on both staff and programming as he seeks to strip £700m from the BBC's annual budget. Yet this whittling down of resources has fuelled anger and concern about the impact on the quality of the broadcaster's output, with spending on new shows poised to fall by £150m this year. The BBC has also ramped up enforcement of the licence fee, with 41m warnings sent out in the 2024 financial year – an increase of almost 13pc year on year. Another method championed by Davie, the former BBC Studios boss, is to boost the broadcaster's commercial income to help balance the books. Measures so far have included taking full control of BritBox International, the BBC's joint streaming venture with ITV, after buying out its rival for £225m. The BBC has also struck a co-production deal with Disney to air Doctor Who overseas, worth an estimated $100m (£73m). But other schemes, such as its plan to run adverts around radio and podcast output, have been scrapped in the face of fierce opposition from commercial rivals. Despite its bold aims, the BBC's commercial income fell to £1.7bn last year from just under £2bn the year before. Overall, the BBC is forecasting a £33m deficit for the coming year. While this is down from the eye-watering £500m shortfall the previous year, it highlights the ongoing strain on the corporation's finances. It is against this precarious backdrop that the BBC has entered discussions with the Government. Ministers have made it clear, however, that reform, or even scrapping, of the licence fee is top of the agenda. While the licence fee is now lower as a proportion of average household income – 0.46pc last year compared to 0.64pc in 2012 – the levy is facing scrutiny in a world where viewers have a plethora of entertainment options. What's more, the licence fee is regressive, with poorer households paying more relative to their income and women disproportionately prosecuted for not paying. So if the licence fee were to be scrapped, what could take its place? One option is replacing it with a subscription model, similar to those of streaming services. However, critics have warned that such a move risks undermining the BBC's ability to serve its audiences and would limit the scope of its output. 'A subscription funding model would be antithetical to the BBC's public service mission, necessarily ending universality of access and undermining its breadth of content,' said analysts at Enders Analysis. Similarly, funding the BBC through advertising has been viewed as a non-starter as it would draw too much money away from the commercial TV and radio sector. Both Davie and Samir Shah, the BBC chairman, have pushed to retain the licence fee with reforms, acknowledging the shortcomings of a regressive flat tax. But what would this look like? Lisa Nandy, the Culture Secretary, has pushed back against the idea of funding the BBC through general taxation, saying it would leave the broadcaster exposed to political interference. Another option is a household tax similar to the one used in Germany. This would boost the BBC's income by widening the payment of the licence fee to all households, rather than just those who use its services. It could also be linked to council tax bands, creating a more progressive system where wealthier households pay more. Other options under consideration include linking the levy to broadband bills – a measure that would take on particular relevance as Britain prepares to switch off terrestrial TV and move to a streaming-only model. It is thought that any of these reforms would reduce the rate of evasion, though ministers will no doubt be reluctant to introduce new taxes, especially in light of the upcoming spending review. In a speech last month, Davie said: 'When it comes to funding, we are not asking for the status quo. We want modernisation and reform. But in doing so, we must safeguard universality.' Alternatively, as the BBC's Charter comes up for renewal, ministers could opt for a bolder rethink. The corporation retains its Reithian principles – named after John Reith, the first director-general – to inform, educate and entertain. But in the modern age, does the BBC still need to be all things to all people? Some industry watchers note that the BBC could drop some of its more peripheral services, such as its education unit Bitesize. BBC bosses are themselves alive to this possibility, and the broadcaster in March launched its largest ever public survey to ask audiences what they want from the broadcaster in the future. A more radical view espoused by a number of industry bigwigs is a merger between the UK's public service broadcasters. Sir Peter Bazalgette, the former chairman of ITV, says: 'There's no doubt in my mind that there ought to be mergers between domestic broadcasters, not just in England, but right across Europe, in order for those broadcasters to survive and have big enough businesses in their streaming services.' Speaking at a conference in London this week, Wayne Garvie, Sony Pictures' international boss, said: 'We've got five public service broadcasters in Britain. The rest of the world might have one. 'It is unsustainable and the future has got to be, surely, Channel 4 and the BBC coming together.' The idea of slimming down the BBC or combining it with its rivals will no doubt rankle supporters who view the universality of access as a key tenet of its purpose. But as competition grows and audiences continue to defect, it is clear the status quo cannot continue. Instead of trying to do more with less, it may be time for the public service broadcaster to simply do less. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Newcastle Hit Back at ‘Saudi Tax' Transfer Demands
Summer Strategy Built on Realism, Not Riches There's a perception Newcastle United are flush with cash, a perception the club believes is both outdated and damaging. As Luke Edwards revealed in his excellent report for Telegraph Sport, Newcastle are 'growing increasingly frustrated by rival clubs putting a 'Saudi tax' on transfers and refuse to be held to ransom over key targets.' Advertisement It's an accusation that's been hanging in the air since the PIF-led takeover in 2021. The expectation is that Newcastle will, and should, spend extravagantly – but the club is pushing back, constrained by the Premier League's strict profit and sustainability rules (PSR). Edwards was given rare insight into the club's negotiating table, and what's clear is that Newcastle are walking a tightrope. They are attempting to add quality to Eddie Howe's squad without blowing apart the financial structure that's slowly, carefully, been built. Value Takes Priority Over Vanity Newcastle's business so far has been quiet, but deliberate. There's clarity in their strategy. They want to recruit in four key positions – goalkeeper, centre-back, right-sided forward, and striker – but they 'cannot spend upwards of £60 million on players when wages are also a consideration.' That's where the Bryan Mbeumo situation becomes telling. As Edwards explains, Mbeumo was 'a leading target by Newcastle's recruitment team' but wage demands and a hefty transfer fee forced the club to walk away. Signing the Brentford man could have meant making him the top earner at the club. Doing so before star striker Alexander Isak is rewarded with a new contract – talks for which are set to begin in July – would be a recipe for dressing room unrest. Advertisement And so, Newcastle hold firm. No player, however talented, is worth tearing up the wage structure for. 'Mbeumo would have likely been Newcastle's highest earner if he had signed,' Edwards wrote. 'That would have inevitably prompted others at the club to ask for parity.' Photo: IMAGO Talent Targets Still in Sight – But on Newcastle's Terms The ambition hasn't waned, but the method is clear. Newcastle have eyes on several exciting players. Burnley's James Trafford remains a top goalkeeping target, while Bournemouth's Antoine Semenyo and Nottingham Forest's Anthony Elanga are being considered for that right-sided role. However, progress is limited – so far – by inflated price tags. Advertisement Brighton's Joao Pedro fits the mould of what Newcastle are after: young, versatile, and Premier League-proven. Yet his price – reportedly up to £70 million – risks consuming a huge chunk of the budget. It's a fee Newcastle could theoretically pay, but not if they want to fill all four positions. As Edwards reports, 'it has caused pause for thought internally.' Eintracht Frankfurt's Hugo Ekitike has long been admired, but the £80 million fee means any move is unlikely unless things change. Likewise, Crystal Palace's Marc Guehi remains of interest in central defence, but Newcastle will wait for his value to drop, knowing his contract is entering its final year. Contract Talks with Isak Key to Summer Stability Everything this summer revolves around Alexander Isak. Newcastle are planning to make him the club's highest earner – a just reward for his performances and potential. But the negotiations won't be easy, and the club knows that bringing in players on higher wages before that deal is done could be destabilising. Advertisement 'Bringing in new players on significantly more money than that before those talks begin is fraught with danger,' Edwards warns. It's a point of sensitivity at St James' Park – one that highlights Newcastle's desire to build a sustainable elite club rather than simply buy one. The Magpies are still shopping in the upper tiers of the market, but they're doing so with calculation, not chaos. Other potential names include James McAtee, liked by Howe and potentially available at £25 million. West Ham's Mohammed Kudus is another admired target, though his future may hinge on finding the right financial compromise. As ever, there will be quiet moves, too. 'Some of their biggest transfers, like Bruno Guimaraes from Lyon and Sandro Tonali from AC Milan, were only known about 48 hours before they signed,' Edwards notes. Newcastle haven't stopped moving – they've just learned to move smartly.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Poundland plots rent cuts in battle for survival
Poundland bosses are hatching a plan to enforce steep rent cuts on store landlords as part of a last-ditch bid for survival. The discount retailer has earmarked hundreds of stores for sharp rent reductions as its Polish parent company looks to persuade new owners to take the chain off its hands. An auction of Poundland has been whittled down to a shoot-out between the distressed investment funds Gordon Brothers and Hilco. The winning bidder will inherit a radical new turnaround plan drawn up by senior management, which proposes taking the axe to Poundland's sprawling estate of more than 800 stores. Between 150 and 200 have been singled out for imminent closure with as many as 500 more selected for swingeing rent bill decreases as bosses seek to dramatically rein in costs. Poundland employs 16,000 people. It is understood the company hopes to impose reductions on landlords of anywhere between 10pc and 50pc, while pulling out of scores of other sites via a court-sanctioned restructuring scheme. However, there is no guarantee that a judge will approve the proposal. A source familiar with the situation said any future decisions on rents would be for a potential new owner. Such extreme steps are usually attempted via an insolvency process known as a company voluntary arrangement in which landlords are handed a vote on any cost-cutting measures that will affect them. Barry Williams, the retailer's former managing director, was parachuted back on to the board at the beginning of the year to help address Poundland's spiralling crisis. Pepco crashed to a £548m loss in December after taking a £650m write-down on its UK operations. It blamed a 'significant decline in performance' as well as spiralling costs at Poundland for the setback. Under new owners, closures are expected to be accompanied by a huge cash injection as they seeks to turn around Poundland's dwindling fortunes. Prospective backers anticipate having to immediately pump in between £70m and £100m to stabilise the company. Those involved in the talks say Poundland's advisers at Teneo hoped to have entered exclusive talks with one of the remaining bidders this week. However, the timetable appears to have slipped, prompting speculation about whether investor appetite had waned as result of the funds needed to turn the retailer around and concerns over the complexity involved. There are also worries that trading at Poundland has continued to deteriorate, exacerbating its precarious situation. Last month, Pepco told investors not to expect 'major proceeds' from any sale of Poundland. It also warned that the chain might not make a profit in the forthcoming financial year. The business continued to face 'highly challenging trading conditions' in the six months to the end of March, it said. Like-for-like sales were down 7.3pc and pre-tax earnings slumped three quarters to €22m (£18.6m). A Pepco Group spokesman said: 'The focus of the group and advisers is currently on a potential sale of Poundland. This is an ongoing process and no final decisions have been taken.' Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
