Exceptional Talent Stage 1 -
Application submitted: 02 Nov 2025
Application referred to TechNation - 11 November 2025
Application rejected 24 November 2025
Today (22 December 2025) is the last day to appeal. My question is - should I appeal?
My application had 3 reference letters from 3 CXOs from different organizations.
My application contained evidence for OC1 and OC3.
Proforma mentioned I do not meet MC and OC1 criteria.
To receive more informed feedback, consider sharing what you’ve sent and your proforma so that experts here can assist you. Also, you should tag them.
What I know is, you should appeal no matter the outcome, before reapplying or something.
This is what proforma says
We have reviewed the applicant’s request for an endorsement decision for the Global Talent Visa
(GTV) under the Exceptional Talent (ET) pathway.
After a thorough assessment, we do not endorse this application.
Below are our specific comments on each aspect of the Tech Nation criteria, reviewing only eligible
evidence that complies with Tech Nation’s guidelines. Any evidence not aligned with the guidelines
has not been considered.
Regarding the applicant’s professional history, they have a respectable and extensive career in
product management and software engineering for large payments companies. While respected,
these are common roles within their peer group, and the size of organisations involved sets a very
high bar for evidence to demonstrate that any impact or innovation was *uniquely* the candidate’s
work. At face value, a respectable candidate but not one of sufficient merit for ET.
The candidate has included numerous links to external evidence. We consider the number of links
excessive and in breach of Tech Nation guidelines. Where these links refer to public articles, we
have reviewed a small selection at random to verify certain claims.
Concerning their mandatory references and support letters, they are kind and highlight good internal
praise within the workplace. However, there is no material mention of significant national or
international acclaim, nor pioneering advancements in technology fields. They do indicate a very
generous individual within the broader community. Again, while positive, these references are not
sufficiently compelling.
On the Mandatory Criterion, we must emphasise that we cannot accept additional support letters
from colleagues at TSYS. Although the examples of work provided are of a good standard, they
demonstrate the candidate performing their role as expected - not pioneering technology leadership
recognised at a national or international level. The specialist events they mention are not high-
profile; many involve representing their employer rather than gaining individual recognition for
pioneering work. Their remuneration is fairly typical for their peer group. The MC is not met.
Regarding Optional Criteria, many of the examples are in the form of external links. This is
inadequate. We need evidence of the candidate’s *distinct* invention or impact, not the collective
outcomes of their teams or TSYS as a whole. While we acknowledge the support letters attempting
to validate these criteria, we require *examples* to assess independently. The links provided,
again, reflect team achievements rather than individual contributions or innovations by the
candidate. We do recognise that their fraud prevention activity likely had a material impact (OC3),
but on its own, we remain unconvinced that this demonstrates a sustained track record of impact on
product-led technology companies. On balance, no optional criteria are satisfied.
In conclusion, we do not endorse this applicant.
@pahuja @Raphael @Akash_Joshi please advise
Hi @KVGlobal
The appeal chances depend on the quality and content of original application and how well it aligns with the benchmarks of the guidelines. Without reviewing the actual application it is almost impossible to comment fairly.
From TN feedback it looks like you had many external links, a high number of reference letters, not strong LORs that spoke beyond your subjective strengths, no industry recognition and no quantified impact of work. If you think that TN has overlooked or misunderstood some evidence that actually meets the guideline then you must appeal. Also, irrespective of the appeal outcome, it’s free of cost and it really helps to get additional feedback to be clearer of the kind of gaps needed to be filled if you were to reapply.
Yes you should appeal.
From experience, applications that are rejected despite meeting one or two criteria tend to have a much higher chance on appeal than applications where no criteria were accepted at all. In your case, OC3 was accepted, right? There may be some misinterpretation or oversight with others, which is exactly what an appeal is designed to address.
Even, regardless of the final outcome, appealing is still valuable because:
I will suggest you send an email to Home Office, asking for a few days extension to be able to finalize on your appeal, giving today is the last day.
All the best.
Thank you @Raphael and @pahuja for quick review and response.
@Raphael - will Home Office accept my request for extension or will they say the timeline is standard and non negotiable? I can try submitting appeal today,[quote=“Raphael, post:6, topic:24996, full:true”]
@KVGlobal
Yes you should appeal.
From experience, applications that are rejected despite meeting one or two criteria tend to have a much higher chance on appeal than applications where no criteria were accepted at all. In your case, OC3 was accepted, right? There may be some misinterpretation or oversight with others, which is exactly what an appeal is designed to address.
Even, regardless of the final outcome, appealing is still valuable because:
I will suggest you send an email to Home Office, asking for a few days extension to be able to finalize on your appeal, giving today is the last day.
All the best.
[/quote]
I would recommend if you can draft a good appeal and submit within timeline do that. Asking for extension has no guarantee as it’s on their discretion plus they would be closed till 2nd Jan for holidays now so the response will be delayed losing more time.
@KVGlobal I’m not sure it’s realistic to rush an appeal, as it often requires carefully reviewing the full set of evidence, reference letters, and Tech Nation guidance multiple times to build a strong case.
I recently supported an applicant who requested an extension for a new application, which was granted. She submitted successfully and later received her endorsement. Since submissions are handled manually via email rather than through a portal that automatically locks you out, this is definitely possible.
That said, if you’d rather not take the risk, you can still submit your draft.
All the best.
I drafted and submitted the appeal. Fingers crossed.
Great and all the best.
Best of luck on your appeal! Let us know what comes through 