Parents' visas

[methuselah]

Has anyone had any particular problems with applications for parents' visas? I understand it can take up to ten years!!!
And to act as sponsor, is the 2 years you're supposed to have lived in Australia cast in stone, or can this rule be bent?

[Gollywobbler]

Hello Methuselah

Are you the Parent or the Child in Australia? I don't want to yammer about 'your parents' if you are the parent, so I'll assume that you are the parent, perhaps?

The ordinary Parent visa is probably taking upwards of 10 years by now. Only 1,000 are granted each year (which is an increase on 750 last year and 650 the year before that.) I tried the Queue Calculator tool with a date of 5 December 2006, to be told that there were 12,200 applicants ahead of whichever parent joined the Queue on 5/12/06.

The biggest risk with this visa is that the parent's health could deteriorate during the long wait, causing refusal of the visa on medical grounds when the parent concerned eventually reaches the head of the Queue.

Are you aware of the Contributory Parent visa, introduced in 2003? It is expensive ($30,000 AUSD per person, roughly, plus a Bond of $10,000 for a single parent or $14,000 for a couple) for the immediately permanent CP 143 visa. However, 3,260 Contributory Parent visas are available this year, supply is keeping pace with demand, and the visa comes through in about 12 months from the time of applying. They are trying to get that wait reduced.

If you are not familiar with the CP visa, please see the two links below:

http://www.immi.gov.au/migrants/family/parent-outside.htm

http://www.immi.gov.au/allforms/booklets/1129.pdf

My mother has a CP 143 visa which was granted four months ago.

Whichever of the visas you consider, do not forget that there is a mandatory Assurance of Support, and the Assurer is means-tested. If he or she does not earn enough to satisfy the income threshold, Centrelink will not accept the proposed AoS. Without it, there is no visa. For more information about the AoS, please see here because neither DIAC or Centrelink explain it properly, in my view:

http://www.acacia-au.com/AOS_Income_Level_Changes_1_July_2006.php

Further swingeing increases in the minimum income required are not impossible, so it is vital to have the AoS sorted out before submitting a CP application, I reckon.

With regard to sponsorship, there has been a Tribunal case where the sponsor had only lived in Australia for 18 months. DIAC refused the visa application but the applicant won on appeal. The argument was that she had moved to Oz, bought a house, had a steady job etc etc. However, it is expensive to go to appeal and also a slow process. It would have been cheaper and quicker for the appellant family just to make a fresh application, I reckon.

On the whole, I would say that it is safer to wait until two years have elapsed. There is no reason why a British Parent wouldn't be allowed to visit Oz in the meanwhile, and again during the wait for the Contributory Parent visa if that is the one chosen. Please see here:

http://www.immi.gov.au/visitors/tourist/676/index.htm

We did not use an agent for my mother's application, so I really did have to research these Parent visas to within an inch of their lives, since I did not have a clue at the outset! In so far as I have learned anything, I will try to help if you have any other queries. I'm not an expert but where I can help with anything, I will try if you wish.

Cheers

Gill

[methuselah]

Gill - thank you, that's very helpful. It would be my parents coming over. We would have to go for a contributory visa and put the money aside into a separate acount (along with the Bond) out of our house sale, although it would mean that we would probably then have an Australian mortgage, which we hadn't reckoned on. Doesn't money talk :(

However, have since heard of a temporary visa which is augmented by a bridging visa meaning they could come over (to Australia) now and stay, provided they apply for the permanent visa whilst there.

I'm just concerned now about the two-year factor for sponsors. An agent out there recently suggested that, as my husband's been out there since September, has a job, and has invested in two properties, that the time element won't be an issue, especially as it's going to be towards the end of the year before we can realistically get out there to join him, (he's coming back for a few months this summer - I hope that won't put the kyboshers on things). Isn't it funny how people can migrate here easy-peasy yet when we want to go abroad, it's a different matter........

[Gollywobbler]

However, have since heard of a temporary visa which is augmented by a bridging visa meaning they could come over (to Australia) now and stay, provided they apply for the permanent visa whilst there.

I'm just concerned now about the two-year factor for sponsors. An agent out there recently suggested that, as my husband's been out there since September, has a job, and has invested in two properties, that the time element won't be an issue, especially as it's going to be towards the end of the year before we can realistically get out there to join him, (he's coming back for a few months this summer - I hope that won't put the kyboshers on things). Isn't it funny how people can migrate here easy-peasy yet when we want to go abroad, it's a different matter........


Hi Methuselah

Here are some cases to read (and scare yourself with) about whether it is wise to try to fudge round the settlement Policy:

http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinosrch.cgi?method=any&query=Contributory+Parent+%2B+sponsor++%2B+settled&meta=%2Fau&mask_path=&mask_path=au%2Fcases%2Fcth%2Ffederal_ct&mask_path=au%2Fcases%2Fcth%2FFCAFC&mask_path=au%2Fcases%2Fcth%2FMRTA

Surely in your case the Tribunal will ask why the family has not seen fit to wait until the blood-child of the visa-applicants is settled in Australia?

Here's why the idea of going out on an ETA and then springing an application for a Contributory Aged Parent visa is no longer the glib wheeze that it once was:

"In the 2006-07 Programme year, within the contributory parent category, there are 3260 visa places available for offshore applicants and 240 for onshore applicants"

http://www.immi.gov.au/migrants/family/parent-visa-processing-priorities.htm

This split in the quota means that they would be on the Bridging Visa for a very long time. During that time, they would almost certainly be excluded from access to Medicare. They would have to pay for very visit to a GP, plus the full price for all their drugs, plus they would not be able to get even emergency hospital treatment for free, I suspect. The Reciprocal Health Care Agreement between the UK and Australia covers tourists and temporary residents, but it does NOT cover people on Bridging Visas.

The question of lying - barefaced lyiung - in order to enter Australia on a short-stay visitor visa with no intention of leaving is an idea that scares the wits out of most parents as well, but if they try to tell anything other than lies on the plane (on the disembarkation card) or at the airport if an official asks what the purpose of the visit is and/or how long they are planning on staying, then they could find themselves with the visa being cancelled at the airport and arrangements being made by DIAC to deport them. Deportees are usually banned from applying for any visa for Australia at all for some considerable period.

I don't see how one can reasonably expect your parents to go to Australia on the strength of what you have apparently heard/been advised without first explaining the potential down-side of these notions to them as well.

Sorry to be the one to suggest caution, but DIAC do NOT play games with this stuff. Only the Americans are even more ferocious than DIAC and there is very little to choose between them in terms of their ferocity with people who try to outwit them.

Cheers

Gill

[methuselah]

Gill - thanks for the links. We have absolutely no intention of lying - everything in my post is the truth. I know how strict they are and would not want to jeopardise their position.

All we can do is rely on the information we are given or see online - the reason the family are waiting are, I guess, the same as that for any other family - we are all very close, my parents have practically brought our children up while wew worked, and of course we don't want to be without them for a minute longer than we need to. When you consider that I am in an occupation for which they are crying out, and my parents won't be applying for any state help, the whole settlement thing seems ludicrous. It's not as if we both want to try it for a lark and then come home!

We'll probably just go for the contributory visa.

[methuselah]

Plus, forgot to mention - parents have 2 dogs which they won't leave behind each time they visit - they would bring them under the PETS scheme. It's £5000+ each time - their capital would no longer exist by the time they were granted even a contributory visa.

[Gollywobbler]

Hi M

Never fear. I wasn't criticising you or your family. I just get SO angry when I hear of Agents trotting out glib theories like the ones offered to you to members of the unsuspecting public. The truth is that half of these glib theories are very seriously flawed for one reason or another, and it is completely irresponsible for any of these people to peddle them as some sort of Easy Cure for really very complex situations.

When I read your post last night, I just wanted to get your agent warmly by the throat and shouT, "AND WHAT ABOUT MEDICARE FOR THESE PARENTS WHILST STRANDED ON YOUR BRIGHT IDEA OF A BRIDGING VISA A?" And so forth!

Don't worry. A very well-known firm of Australian Solicitors suggested this daft ETA theory to me when I was looking for the right way to help my own mother. I'm a UK based solicitor by background so I retorted, "Can you show me the section of the UK/Oz RHCA that extends Medicare to the Britsh holder of a Bridging Visa A, please?" "Derrrr. I don't know whether it does," said the Aussie solicitor. Me: "Neither do I, so we will err on the side of caution, assume that I am right, and I am not prepared to take stupid, unnecessary, avoidable risks with my mother's medical safety. My way might be long-winded but my way is 100% SAFE for my mother. Therefore it is the only route I am prepared to consider for her."

I wanted the solicitor aboard because he is good at winning appeals against visa refusals on medical grounds and at one stage I thought Mum was going to come unstuck on the meds because of being disabled. I hadn't even asked for his advice about the visa-strategy, so I was not impressed to hear him trotting out ideas which I had already considered and had rejected because I felt they were not good enough ideas for my beloved mother. He would have chucked her to the wolves, potentially, because he clearly hadn't even thought about whether she would be able to claim Medicare whilst on this Glib Wheeze of a Bridging Visa A.

I was also not prepared to put Mum through a 24 hour journey during which she would have been shaking with fear at the thought that she might have to lie to an Immi official on arrival in Oz. She would probably have expired on the plane or something if we had done that to the poor old dear. These Wheezes might be OK for others but they are NOT OK for my mother because what looks Clever on paper ignores the poor soul who is going to have to pull it off in real life.

It is no blinking way to advise a client, in short!!!

I do know what you mean about the costs. Are you sure it is £5000 sterling and not A$5000? I know it is expensive to ship pets, but I didn't think it was as bad as you say? We have not tried to do it, though. I'm relying solely on what I've read on the forums with this bit.

But please be assured that I was NOT trying to have a go at you personally or at any member of your family.

Cheers

Gill

[Gollywobbler]

Hi again, M

Sorry - some of the above might not mean anything to you because PerthPoms is an offshoot of the Poms In Oz forum, which is bigger and livelier than this one as yet.

My mother turned 86 a few days after her CP 143 visa was granted last year. She has osteoporosis (brittle bone diesease.) As a result of that she broke her back in a fall 10 years ago. A piece of bone is pressing on her spinal chord, causing partial paralysis in her legs. Because of that, Mum needs a zimmer frame at home and a wheelchair anywhere else.

Because of my own background, I didn't really need help to work out the best way to handle the visa application itself. However, the Medical Officer of the Commonwealth asked for a geriatrician's report, which scared me because neither Mum's own GP (who was involved) or the Panel Doctor had even mentioned getting a geriatrician involved.

I was really worried when this happened because I thought we were heading for a visa refusal on medical grounds. The application itself was easy enough but there was NO way I would have been able to handle an appeal to the Tribunal on my own. So that that point I hired a Top Gun firm of Aussie solicitors with a good track record in winning in the medico-legal arena with these visas and put them on a watching brief just in case I needed them to take over quickly from me. I think you only get 28 days to lodge an appeal against a visa refusal and I wouldn't even have known where to start with the notion!

However, the solicitor concerned instantly started second-guessing me on the visa-strategy which I had adopted. He was just meddling because the process was already under way. But he said, "Why this long winded route? Why didn't you just bring here on an ETA and then stick her on a Bridging Visa A?"

Which was really quite irritating since I had not requested his advice or his opinion about why I had decided not to do that....!

However, he wasn't needed in the end because the MoC decided that Mum was OK on the meds so my worst fears did not come to pass.

Hope this makes my earlier post a bit clearer.

Cheers

Gill

[methuselah]

Hi Gill,

Sorry to be so long responding - been in bed with the wretched flu :cry: .

Thank you for taking the time and trouble to reply - I do appreciate it, it does underline the fact that we need to be so careful, even if the agent is Government approved!

To play really safe, I would rather fork out the £25K+ on a contributory visa and know that it's going to be quicker, and they'll be eligible for Medicare (not that they'll need it, hopefully).

We tried several companies about the dogs and none bothered to reply - the £2500 per pooch is anecdotal. Horrendous, isn't it? They're so devoted to their dogs though that we'd have to ship them over, even for any short visit. I think these companies play on the emotional aspect of the bond between people and their pets.

So much to think about and so much to lose if it all goes wrong! I'm really glad things worked out well for you and your mother after such an anxious time. I wish her a long and happy retirement with you.

When I'm over this damned bug I'm going to spend a long time poring over all the information I have on parents' visas, including the links you posted, get the family together, and discuss. I just wish they didn't make it all so complicated! :?

[BullcreekBob]

They're so devoted to their dogs though that we'd have to ship them over, even for any short visit.

g'day

So the dogs will have a longer holiday then?

I think the quarantine regulations would mean that there's no such thing as a short visit.

[methuselah]

Hiya Bob,

30 days we're told :lol: . However, not financially worth it as it's horribly expensive and very traumatic for the woofers too.