I think he was right on the benefits question, Waheed. Benefits DO matter when you're applying for ILR, because you are not generally allowed to claim benefits before you have ILR. But once you have ILR, then you are legally entitled to claim such benefits as you may be eligible for. Exercising a legal entitlement doesn't make you a bad person, and I do not believe that the fact that someone is claiming benefits (so long as he isn't doing it dishonestly) should make any difference to a naturalisation application.
But if he was talking about naturalisation, I think he is horribly wrong on the "dates" question, if that is what he really said. The date that a visa was issued is absolutely irrelevant. The residence requirements for naturalisation are all about physically being present (legally) in the UK between two dates.
But I think he was talking about ILR, and if this is the case, then he was correct. It is absolutely vital that, when issued a two year "spouse" visa, the visa holder travels to UK less than a month after the visa is issued. To take the example you have given, the visa - and therefore his permission to stay - expires on 14 January 2008. By then, he will have been in the UK less than two years, so he won't be eligible to apply for ILR on 14 January 2008. So what he has to do is apply for "further leave" some time in the 28 days leading up to the expiry date of his visa, and then, in the 28 days leading up to the expiry of the "further leave" he needs to apply for ILR. So he has to pay two lots of ID fees. If he doesn't do that, his permission to stay will lapse and he will have to start again on building up the two years necessary for ILR.
paul
