67
submitted 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) by Wildmimic@anarchist.nexus to c/leopardsatemyface@lemmy.world

Mark Smith, who has severe health issues, says he was told three times he needed to do nothing in order to remain after Brexit. I personally doubt that, since there has been very clear legislation regarding exactly this situation.

top 12 comments
sorted by: hot top new old
[-] i_stole_ur_taco@lemmy.ca 33 points 6 days ago

There’s nothing in the article suggesting any of the people facing deportation voted in favour of brexit, is there? This doesn’t feel like LAMF.

But the tone of all the people quoted in the article… holy shit. Big “these rules should not apply to British people” energy.

[-] abbiistabbii@piefed.blahaj.zone 8 points 5 days ago

This is basically the attitude to Brits abroad: they think they are a special class who can do anything they want.

[-] ohulancutash@feddit.uk 9 points 6 days ago

Because the withdrawal agreement was that these rules would not apply to British people already resident in the EU, just as EU citizens resident in the UK.

[-] Windex007@lemmy.world 9 points 5 days ago

He was unaware, however, that Sweden was among 13 of the 27 EU member states that required Britons living in the country before Brexit to make a formal application to remain. Other countries, such as Spain, did not opt for that system and just required Britons to declare they were a resident.

Not sure who to believe here

[-] ohulancutash@feddit.uk 4 points 5 days ago

Initially Sweden advised UK nationals that no registration was necessary. They have recently changed their minds and “forgot” to tell them.

[-] Windex007@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago

Considering the deadline was 2021, I'm not sure I'd characterize this as a recent change of heart.

Do you have any source for this? I'm having a tough time finding anything supporting your claim that Sweden has changed their position on this since brexit came into effect.

I can easily find bombastic claims from pro-brexit talking heads unilaterally asserting that the EU will continue to extend every privilege in a post brexit world, but I suspect it's possible they were not actually deriving those assurances from discussions with the governments which they claimed they were speaking on behalf of.

[-] Mantzy81@aussie.zone 19 points 6 days ago

Looks like he just didn't ask the right people the right questions and made assumptions, eg asking the tax office about immigration rules and, because it's a government department, thinking that was enough. A tax department does not make immigration rules unsurprisingly to most, except this guy. That's less LAMF and more idiocy.

[-] yesman@lemmy.world 12 points 6 days ago
[-] ohulancutash@feddit.uk 7 points 6 days ago

Yes, the very clear legislation was that British citizens resident in the EU at the time of Brexit retained full residency rights. The current Swedish government is choosing to ignore the law for some reason.

[-] Ilovethebomb@sh.itjust.works 4 points 5 days ago

If the advice given from the tax agency is in writing, then that's an open and shut case in my view. He was told he didn't need to do anything, and believed them.

[-] Theoriginalthon@lemmy.world 4 points 5 days ago

He basically fucked up and didn't do the right thing or find the right answers. Plenty of people managed to secure residency or even better citizenship in EU countries after Brexit.

[-] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 0 points 5 days ago

Nah, this isn't it, bud.

this post was submitted on 17 Oct 2026
67 points (87.6% liked)

Leopards Ate My Face

10529 readers
627 users here now

Rules:

  1. The mods are fallible; if you've been banned or had a post/comment removed, please appeal.
  2. Off-topic posts will be removed. If you don't know what "Leopards ate my Face" is, try reading this post.
  3. If the reason your post meets Rule 1 isn't in the source, you must add a source in the post body (not the comments) to explain this. If the reason is in the source but is tedious to find (e.g. in a lengthy video), you must add an explanation for where it is.
  4. Posts should use high-quality sources (for a rough idea, check out this list), and posts should retain the title (if one exists) from works like news articles, videos, etc. You may (but need not) edit your post if the source changes the title. (If you're only using an excerpt from an article that's otherwise not about LAMF, you can use the quote in the title.) Other types of posts should have a title which accurately, relatively neutrally describes their contents.
  5. For accessibility reasons, an image of text must either have alt text or a transcription in the post body.
  6. Reposts within 1 year or the Top 100 of all time are subject to removal. Within moderator discretion, this doesn't just include reposts of the exact same media but also includes e.g. a secondary source telling basically the exact same story as another that was already posted.
  7. This is not exclusively a US politics community. You're encouraged to post stories about anyone from any place in the world at any point in history as long as you meet the other rules.
  8. All Lemmy.World Terms of Service apply.

Also feel free to check out:

Icon credit C. Brück on Wikimedia Commons.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS