Appeal (review) for Refusal for Endorsement at Stage 1 of a Fintech Founder, business route applicant

[Noddy]

Dear Forum Members

I have been recently refused for Endorsement at Stage 1 due to not meet OC1 criteria. My MC & OC3 criteria are met. Let me summarise my application below, put assessor feedback screenshot and raise my concerns/questions following that.

I submitted my application on 1st April 2024 and got my rejection email in 2 weeks.

In brief, I am Co-Founder & CBO/CEO of my fintech start-up which has raised more than £1million from institutional and angel investors. I was earlier endorsed on start-up visa for the same business and currently operating it while residing in London, UK.

For the visa application, I submitted the following documents.

1. Filled complete application form

2. 3 page CV

3. Personal Statement

4. LOR 1: from Head of Incubation University Incubation center where I was an alumni and endorsed for Start-up visa

5. LOR 2: Founder & CEO of £300m Asset Management Company, where they invested in my company as majority shareholder and acts as Chairman

6. LOR 3: Board Member who is Seasoned Director in my company, having 30+ years of finance & regtech experience, providing evidence of all my operations and successes.

7. MC1: Reference Letter from Industry Professional who himself is endorsed as Global Talent for Product strategist & his angel investment activities. He vetted my Product Innovation & founder skills

8. MC2: Market Recognition, Awarded as 'Market Entrant of the Year’ of 2023 at the India Global Forum, Recognised by Forbes India for Select 200 Companies for global business potential, Recognised by Entrepreneurs Today in their 30Under30 Magazine as fintech entrepreneur.

9. MC3: Published a whitepaper with SSRN on smart contract based fintech solution.

10. MC4: Multiple (25 instances recorded) for Public Appearances at exhibitions, Speaking Engagements with my niche audience virtually/in-person, Accelerators Participation, Fellowship Participation and more

11. OC1.a: Letter of Reference from our reputed Software Development Partner who covered our engagement, milestones worked upon and product innovation we are trying to achieve. He also shared the Product Demo Links,

12. OC1.b: Evidence for each business should include your last set of audited accounts, projections for current financial year and articles of association.
    That included AOA/MOA, Certificate of Incorporation, Financial Projections, Management Accounts, Business Plan, Pitch deck, Product Demo Videos, and bank statements reflecting cash inflow and business expenses. With screenshots of only Financial Projections, Management Accounts, rest of the documents provided through google drive links.

13. OC1.c: Evidence of employment contract with salary information including any bonus and equity options and history of earnings that included Employment Contract, PaySlips for last 12 months which included Founders Basic Pay, Bonuses, Incentives, Perks, etc. With Screenshots of only one historical pay-slip and employment contract.

14. OC3.a: Letter of Reference from a VC firm who invests in under-represented founders. They backed me as well. Showing impact we are creating through our product and reach.

15. OC3.b: Showing Impact created by Nakul Garg- Job Provider, Investment inflow in the UK, and more. Term Sheets and bank statements reflecting investments with screenshots, Job Provider in the UK to 8 people with PAYE payment details screenshots. Rest of the documents like shareholder list and organisation chart, etc provided through google link.

16. OC3.c: Client Testimony by a VC firm who used our solution and expected his user experience and impact we are creating for them and investors like them.

Assessment Panel Feedback:

Based on the assessment panel feedback, I have the following questions:

Questions:

Q1. Can I use evidence from MC documents to prove ‘Individual Innovation’ for OC1 ?
(Explanation: As per TN Guidance, I understand that we cannot use the same piece of evidence for more than one criteria. However, in case of appeal, if I use evidence MC1: where the product strategist vetted my product innovation skills, can that be considered as valid evidence for appeal?)

Q2. Can I use evidence from my LOR documents to prove ‘Individual Innovation’ for OC1 ?
(Explanation: I have lot of individual innovation reference from my LOR1 and LOR 3, will this be counted as valid evidence for appeal?)

Q3. Can I challenge the OC1 feedback on:’The evidence provided outlines the milestones the team has worked on as well as demo product, company documents, management accounts and pay slips’ using the TN Guidance?

(Explanation: As per TN Guidance for OC1, all the provided information is relevant: Please see the highlighted text from the TN Guidance.

I am confused, why they find it less relevant for innovation, as all key aspects mentioned by them in the feedback are shown as example of relevant innovation evidence by TN Guidance?

However, I am also planning to highlight the individual innovation is demonstrated through the reference letter for OC1.a. by our tech partner where he mentions ‘the team’ innovation and thinking demeanour, however it is implied the team is led by the founder product vision)

Q4. I am not sure why the ‘Additional feedback’ by the assessment panel has all ‘NO’s. Just to justify non eligibility?

Do I need to appeal against all 5 Additional feedbacks or just OC1?

Q5. The application edit track record shows only one edit record for 12th April 2024 15:42 BST

Should I highlight and challenge the sincerity of the assessment panel while reviewing my application by emphasis the appeal criteria ‘a piece of evidence was not properly looked’?

Q6. Since I had lot of information to present through OC1.b and OC1.c as per TN Guidance, apart from screenshots I also used google drive links to all evidence documents in it. I understand as per the TN Gudiance that Documents containing only links to online sources are not acceptable however there is no mention of google drive links are not acceptable sources. Thus, should I highlight all the product innovation information I provided through google drive links OC1.b and OC1.c docs to demonstrate ‘a piece of evidence was not properly looked’?

Q7. Can I use some evidence from my TN application and personal statement for ‘individual innovation’? I have few text references of ‘Individual Innovation’ in those text files.

Q8. Can I use reference of MC3: Whitepaper publication as innovation reference? Will it be useful for my OC1 Individual Innovation evidence as proof of new digital field or concept? However, I think doing so I may weaken my mandatory criteria, so this might be risky if the assessment panel use the logic of ‘you cannot use the same piece of evidence for more than one criteria’. Please advise.

Q9. Should I also appeal to consider me for Exceptional Talent instead of Promise?

(Explanation: I applied to Global Talent Exceptional Talent route, however the assessment panel writes in their feedback the following:
‘We note the applicant’s digital technology experience is under 5 years, which means the applicant qualifies for the Exceptional Promise pathway. Reviewing the evidence, the applicant meets the requirements under Promise for both the Mandatory Criteria and Optional Criteria 3.'.
My understanding is if I prove the OC1 then the Home Office can award me Global Talent visa under Exceptional Promise route as the Assessment Panel approved my evidences for MC & OC3, however if I wish to appeal for ET eligibility, would it make sense? if yes, then how can I do it? I have overall 10 years of experience with under 5 years of tech entrepreneurial experience).

Q10. Should I also challenge the ‘Individual Innovation’ demonstration question raised by the Assessment Panel? As per the TN Guidance for OC1, nowhere it mentions to demonstrate ‘individual innovation’. However, I state the following:

‘Whilst the Assessment Panel feedback specifically highlights the lack of demonstrative evidence of ‘Individual Innovation’, the ‘Optional Criteria 1’ guidance on Tech Nation website does not specifically indicate the need to evidence ‘Individual innovation’, but rather on ‘any genuine and significant product-led digital technology businesses you have established as a founder or senior executive’. Having said that my individual contribution to innovation in the field of product led digital technology has been covered in several of the pieces of evidence in my application as outlined below:…’? Please advise.

Once I hear the forum input, I will draft the appeal and share a quick summary here for the forum perusal.

I will really appreciate your inputs at the earliest as the appeal time period is ticking.

Special request for review & insights to @Francisca_Chiedu @ask4jubad

Thanks & Warm Regards
NG

[hsafra]

OC1 is about personal innovation and it looks like the TN board didn’t find evidence for that in the files you submitted. They’re feedback shows they judged the evidence as team achievements and not your personal ones. You can try to explain that since you’re the founder the innovation is yours but you need to try so find support for that in the evidence you submitted to OC1 - try to find sections mentioning it.

Q1, Q2: you can try to refer to them in the appeal but since you can’t submit new evidence in an appeal TN might ignore this

Q3: if the letter mentions “the team” and your involvement is only implied than it’s a weak piece of evidence. Everything should mention you by name to make it easier for TN to understand.

Q4: Appeal OC1. I don’t believe you need to address the individual NOs in the additional feedback section

Q5: edit history isn’t grounds for appeal since it’s not a published criteria. And you might have missed an update

Q6: TN rarely if ever look at external links, google drive included. It’s covered under the “All evidence submitted must be legible to be considered during assessment.” sentence - your submission needs to be able to stand on it’s own. You can’t appeal on this basis.

Q7: The personal statement isn’t evidence in itself since it’s completely self authored.

Q8: Same as Q1&2 - that would be reusing evidence between criteria. This isn’t allowed.

Q9: What other experience do you have in these 10 years? Is it relevant for the GTV?

Q10: The criteria reads “a proven track record for innovation as a founder or senior executive of a product-led digital technology company or as an employee working on a new digital field or concept” and all the feedback received about it here and in other declines shows that it’s on the it’s about personal innovation, not a part of an innovative team. I don’t think challenging this will help - you need to able to demonstrate your own innovation.

[Francisca_Chiedu]

You just need to appeal the decision. You can’t add any new evidence in your appeal. In your appeal state that you have provided evidence of innovation based on the examples provided in the tech Nation guide. Also go on to further clarify why this product is innovative in more details, you don’t need to introduce new evidence but help the assessor understand why your product is novel or first if it’s kind of that’s the case

You have more than 10 years experience but only 3 years in tech means you are eligible for exceptional promise. Often some founders assume raising substantial investments and accelerator acceptance make them eligible for promise. Far from it! You clearly do have the potential to become a leader in the sector. Since you have over 25 instances of conference speaking, you should have applied for optional criteria 2 and 3. Innovation can be tricky but since you are just one criterion short, a convincing review may overturn the decision not to endorse your application.

[Noddy]

Thanks alot @hsafra @Francisca_Chiedu for your valuable feedback.

I am structuring my Appeal draft as following:
PS: the content is not complete yet, just want to confirm whether the structing of appeal is correct?

With great respect to the panel feedback, I would like to appeal my Assessment Panel feedback for OC1 where the Assessment Panel feedback specifically highlights the lack of demonstrative evidence of ‘Individual Innovation’.

As per the Tech Nation Guide for ‘Optional Criteria 1’ on Tech Nation website (Tech Nation Visa Guide - Tech Nation), ‘‘You can demonstrate this by providing evidence of any genuine and significant product-led digital technology businesses you have established as a founder or senior executive which is currently active or has been dissolved in the last five years. Any company provided as evidence should demonstrate a level of income beyond solely covering the applicant’s salary and must have been commercially successful or otherwise demonstrate how the applicant meets the endorsement criteria.’’

It does not specifically indicate the need to evidence ‘Individual innovation’, but rather on ‘any genuine and significant product-led digital technology businesses you have established as a founder or senior executive’. Having said that my ‘individual innovation’ in the field of product led digital technology has been covered in several of the evidences in my application as outlined below:

1. In the document titled ‘Testimony _ xxxxxxxx_ Product Innovation’ (OC1.a.) on Page 2 of the first paragraph starting with ‘The idea discussed with…’ ending with ‘providing an investment liquidity pool’ and third paragraph starting with ‘Currently the team is working towards’ and ending with ‘digital technologies innovative solutions’, and fourth paragraph starting with ’NG is a recognised tech entrepreneur’ ending with ‘resonate with similar innovations’.
   The above evidence provided through the letter of reference by xxxx (our tech partner) clearly highlights the ‘individual innovation’ led by me as the founder of the company/project. As a founder of my startup with young employees and fresh graduates, the onus of product innovation has largely been spear headed through my efforts and driving the team to execute the same. Under my leadership, the product innovation was performed to achieve product milestones.

2. In the LOR document titled ‘LOR 1_ xxxxxx’, author has spoken about by individual product innovation by me on page 2 on ‘Innovation’ section starting with ‘The applicant has a genuine, original business plan’ till ending with ‘provided him a First Mover Advantage in the market’
   Brief explanation on evidence:

3. My innovation quotes from LOR2 by the Author 2
   Brief explanation on evidence:

4. MC1_document referring my Product Innovation quoted by Product Strategist.
   Brief explanation on evidence:

5. AoA, Management Accounts, Financial Projections, Employment Contract, Payslips, etc were provided as evidence OC1.b. and OC1.c. as they are shown as examples of evidence in OC1 section of TN Guidance ( * Evidence for each business should include your last set of audited accounts, projections for current financial year and articles of association., * Evidence of employment contract with salary information including any bonus and equity options and history of earnings.)

6. Whitepaper authored and published by me on the same product innovation (smart-contract based investments).
   Question for whitepaper as evidence: Would they minus it from my Mandatory criteria evidences and can be risk to my MC approval? Though I have two other strong MC2 & MC4 evidences to support MC for GT Promise.

Convincing statement by myself about my product innovation, its novelty (first of its kind) and market validation.

In light of the above highlighted evidences, I request the assessment panel to positively reconsider the fulfillment of OC1 as part of my application.

Please share your thoughts @Francisca_Chiedu @hsafra @alexnk @oluwabig @vv123 @Jazeb and other community members on the structure of the appeal draft. Will really appreciate it. Thanks

[Francisca_Chiedu]

You are making reference evidence in other criteria. Don’t forget that your evidence must be unique for each criteria. Focus more on how the evidence provided to prove innovation meets the criteria. Your response is also lengthy, the endorsement review box can have limited number of words it can take. So you may need to split it into two or more boxes.
For OC1 evidence, did you show evidence of revenue generated?

[Noddy]

Hi @Francisca_Chiedu
Thanks for your input.

Is my understanding correct by saying that, you meant, I can not use innovation evidence mentioned in LORs and MC evidences I submitted?

My idea was to use innovation input not only from OC1 evidences but also from all evidence documents I have submitted as I can not submit new evidence but documents submitted as LORs and for MC where I am recognised as emerging talent based on the innovation I have achieved and recognised which is part of overall submission. What’s you say?

Ok, I will break down ‘Individual Innovation’ argument and other evidence for innovation arugment in seperate boxes.

Yes, for OC1, I have submitted a file mentioned in OC1.b. where I have put a screenshot of financial projections for this as well as the management accounts reflecting the current revenue of the business.
Pls emphasis, how should I highlight revenue element in my appeal?

Also, wanted to know, should I quote my evidence sentences “…” or provide the full text in the given appeal/review box? As the instructions only asks for referencing Immigration Rules, no information on evidences quotes referencing.

Thanks @Francisca_Chiedu for your continued contribution to this community.

[Francisca_Chiedu]

Is the revenue substantial enough to cover your salary and more?