Guest patience Posted November 28, 2009 Share Posted November 28, 2009 What do you think of this email below? And do you know what the loop hole is. Subject: Migration Help Last Weekend you attended the State Governments of Australia’s migration event. I hope you found that it helped you on your way to making the move down under. If not we have come across some interesting legislation in the immigration laws. If you’re still interested in applying for a visa to gain permanent residency to Australia, we have come across a major loophole in the South Australia skilled sponsorship visa route. If you have a university degree then there is a very good chance that you will be able to obtain a permanent visa. Unfortunately this loophole is soon to be removed, so we have a very limited time frame to work with. All paper work must be lodged in Australia by the 18th Dec 09. If you are interested you must contact us immediately so that we can assess whether your application will be successful or not. Another issue surrounding migration is how and when to organise your finances. A major concern is pensions. Is it best to transfer them to Australia or should they remain in the UK? Australia has a different tax system from that of the UK and, as a result, any UK assets, investments, savings or pensions that you may have could, potentially, be taxed by Australia. (company name removed) has many years experience in giving UK migrants advice in both minimizing any potential Australian tax liabilities and taking advantage of any pre migration opportunities. If you have any queries or concerns, or wish to book an appointment to see us at our office or one of our convinient locations throughout the UK, please don’t hesitate to call Remember, if you sign up by 31st December you will pay only 15% VAT on the agreed fee, while it will be 17½% from 1st January 2010. I apologise if this email is not applicable to you, but if it is we look forward to hearing from you soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudi Posted November 28, 2009 Share Posted November 28, 2009 OOOO I would be very very careful. I have no idea about whether there is a loophole or not, but anyone trying to get business this way should not be trusted. Love Rudi x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wanderer Posted November 28, 2009 Share Posted November 28, 2009 Loopholes, Tax Advantages etc., you can just about hear the snake oil being processed! Desperation! breeds all sorts of scum is my thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wrussell Posted November 28, 2009 Share Posted November 28, 2009 Be careful when sticking your neck in loopholes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jamie Smith Posted November 29, 2009 Share Posted November 29, 2009 They're a bit slow off the mark if they've only come across it now. It was a well known exploit, and yes, it is being closed. Please don't ask me what it is because I don't give migration advice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wanderer Posted November 29, 2009 Share Posted November 29, 2009 Jamie, Please don't ask me what it is because I don't give migration advice. Why so bashful? I've even seen you advising on immigration legislation that an RMA posted:biggrin: And you know from that no cash for comment episode you can advise whatever you like:yes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Collett Posted November 29, 2009 Share Posted November 29, 2009 Go Matilda - Your Gateway to Australia - News and http://www.vetassess.com.au/download/qualification_assessment/vetassess_announcement_final_with_occ.pdf Best regards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jamie Smith Posted November 29, 2009 Share Posted November 29, 2009 Jamie, Why so bashful? I've even seen you advising on immigration legislation that an RMA posted:biggrin: And you know from that no cash for comment episode you can advise whatever you like:yes: You're the lay agent wanderer. My comments fall within guidelines given me by DIAC legal department about what I can and cannot do/say. If you were to ask them directly what you could say they would tell you not to give the advice as you have. It's only your non de plume that isolates you from investigation and prosecution. I don't use one. I prefer to comment on the behind the scenes issues, behavioural stuff, thinking things through, reasons why things happen. I try hard not to give specific one on one advice and certainly won't direct people to high risk procedures that go like this: "Apply today, spend time and money, lose both as a result of known impending rule changes". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gollywobbler Posted November 29, 2009 Share Posted November 29, 2009 Hi Patience If a Registered Migration Agent is responsible for the e-mail that you received, the only thing that the RMA is demonstrating is his/her own woeful ignorance of the way the Aussie rules for GSM visas work. That is hardly an advertisement for the agent concerned. S/he has only just become aware of the most basic, central rules it would seem. Cheers Gill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jamie Smith Posted November 29, 2009 Share Posted November 29, 2009 Hi Patience If a Registered Migration Agent is responsible for the e-mail that you received, the only thing that the RMA is demonstrating is his/her own woeful ignorance of the way the Aussie rules for GSM visas work. That is hardly an advertisement for the agent concerned. S/he has only just become aware of the most basic, central rules it would seem. Cheers Gill I think that company M (whose name has now been removed) is just a pension transfer organisation that has had a somewhat patchy relationship with registered migration agents over the years and shouldn't be giving advice, for reasons you can see. As such I wouldn't be surprised if they're touting. Their business will be suffering just as much as the agents' have been. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest patience Posted November 29, 2009 Share Posted November 29, 2009 Thank you for all your reply's, I didn't like the tone of this email either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lavender776 Posted November 29, 2009 Share Posted November 29, 2009 I had this same loophole menioned to me by an agent some time ago (well, I think it may be the same loophole). I was put off going this way as I assumed with my luck, something would go wrong and then scupper my plans for ever. I always wondered though, why did this loophole only apply to SA and (if the agent told me correctly), only one particular occupation? At the time it was mentioned, I didn't know that the subject your degree was in and work experience didn't really matter as far as VETASSESS were concerned, so it did make me wonder how I could apply under a certain occupation, when I had no experience or quals in it. Now that I know it didn't really matter what my degree was in, it still niggles me as to why only that one occupation. Sorry, if I appear to be talking in riddles, but no-one seems to mentioning the actual 'loophole', so I thought I'd better follow the same etiquette. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest rachbarlow Posted November 29, 2009 Share Posted November 29, 2009 I cannot see this being true either...... just a chance of someone looking for gullable desperate people, like me!!!, to get to oz, and make a fast $$$$$ in the process. Instead once they have your money.... that would be as far as the process goes I feel, and they would prob disappear (because the loophole would have closed of course!!). Lets look at this in all realism, the rules that the DIAC have in place and alike organisations cannot even agree one the rules that they have in place, they are changed on a regular basis, just like in Sept with more to come. I find it highly unlikely that these organisations and states would leave 'loopholes', when the rules they do have they cannot agree on and are constantly changing. Just my opinion, if it made sence!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Welshtone Posted November 30, 2009 Share Posted November 30, 2009 The so-called loophole exists for 3 reasons: 1 - VETASSESS do not (until 01 Jan 2010) require any relevance between the Nominated occupation and the required formal qualification AND need no experience (relevant or otherwise) as part of their assessment. Thus somebody with a knitting degree can get recognition from VETASSESS as a Graphic Designer or ZOOlogist or any of the 100 or so 40 and 50 point occupations where VETASSESS are the assessing body. 2 - DIAC do not require that the 12 months of recent skilled experience, in the previous 24 month period, be in, or related to, the nominated occupation 3 - South Australia have a policy to greatly increase their population over the coming years. Thus they are prepared to approve 485 sponsorship applications, that meet DIAC requirements mentioned at 2. Although all 3 of the above are required for this "loophole" it is, in my opinion, South Australia's willingness to approve sponsorship applications that clearly do not address specified skills shortages in their 485 list, that is responsible for this anomoly/loophole. Regards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 Hi Can you tell me if this applies to a 49yr old with a degree? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Collett Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 The general rule is that skilled visa applicants must be aged under 45 when they lodge their visa application. Best regards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest patience Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 Are you related to Toni Collett Australian Actress / Singer by any chance? The general rule is that skilled visa applicants must be aged under 45 when they lodge their visa application. Best regards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kazzarazza Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 The so-called loophole exists for 3 reasons: 1 - VETASSESS do not (until 01 Jan 2010) require any relevance between the Nominated occupation and the required formal qualification AND need no experience (relevant or otherwise) as part of their assessment. Thus somebody with a knitting degree can get recognition from VETASSESS as a Graphic Designer or ZOOlogist or any of the 100 or so 40 and 50 point occupations where VETASSESS are the assessing body. 2 - DIAC do not require that the 12 months of recent skilled experience, in the previous 24 month period, be in, or related to, the nominated occupation 3 - South Australia have a policy to greatly increase their population over the coming years. Thus they are prepared to approve 485 sponsorship applications, that meet DIAC requirements mentioned at 2. Although all 3 of the above are required for this "loophole" it is, in my opinion, South Australia's willingness to approve sponsorship applications that clearly do not address specified skills shortages in their 485 list, that is responsible for this anomoly/loophole. Regards This doesn't sound quite right to me. 1: Vetassess turned down a Massage Therapist skills assessment to an applicant, having Diploma and Advanced Diploma, because it "didn't have the college on its list" even though the applicant also has a BA Hons in Leisure Studies. 2: DIAC require that the "qualifications" are closely related to the nominated occupation, so the Knitting Degree/Graphic Designer example wouldn't get through DIAC even if you had SS. 3: If SA, in particular, are prepared to do "anything" to increase it's population, why doesn't it automatically grant State Sponsorships to all those who have nominated SA as their chosen destination - such as family sponsored, for example, who have no intention of living anywhere else BUT SA. (I believe Tasmania consider people with close family ties in the state) The whole process doesn't make any sense, to me, anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Collett Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 Are you related to Toni Collett Australian Actress / Singer by any chance? Err ... no. Sorry! Best regards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Welshtone Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 Hi Kazz 1 - VETASSESS would have to approve any skills assessment application for a Massage Therapist, where the applicant evidenced the holding of a recognised Diploma and/or Degree. The likely scenario is that the applicant's diploma was not recognised and no evidence of the degree was provided in the VETASSESS application. So a quick application prior to 01 January could bring success although any 50 point occupation may be better. 2 - this is not the case - DIAC requires skilled experience of 12/24 months in ANY/ANY SOL occupation 3 - They do, but you have to apply to SA and meet the requirements - South Australia have been approving 475 sponsorships for those with relatives in Australia as long as they have 12 months recent skilled experience, nominate an occupation on their 475 list - this is what has been going on for the last few years. It just looks more obvious now as the 475 list decreases and we are having to lodge silly applications like Zoologist and Ships Master or whatever it is. Anyway, it all ends on 01 January 2010. Regards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.