So browsing the Supreme Court webcasts, as you do, I came across a case of a Tier 4 student whose application was refused by the Home Office because his bank statement showing the required funds was a few days short of the required 28 day period. There was no doubt that the student, Mandalia, had the funds - indeed, they were more than double the required level, or that he was a genuine student who met all the other requirements.
Home Office will have spent tens, maybe even hundreds, of thousands fighting a student who paid so much money to study here, and was refused his leave to remain for a reason that could easily have been resolved with the HO contacting the applicant requesting the missing pages - especially when they had sent him a letter on receipt of his application saying they would do just that!
Watching the webcast it came out that neither the lengthy application form nor the 'Help Text' accompanying the form mentioned that the period which the bank statement should cover was a minimum of 28 days. I am really interested to see what the judges make of this - they seem to be able to cut through the waffle to get to the heart of the matter, but my judgement on how judges come across in a hearing and what they actual decide doesn't have a great track record!
It was really sad as well to see the applicant with his mum in the audience, put through the grind for such a trivial mistake.
Worth a watch if you have a spare few hours: https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2014-0059.html