Raul Senise

DRC is an abbreviation for Decision Ready Checklist, which an Agent must attach and sign to apply under the Decision Ready priority process.

If lodged correctly you should have received the confirmation of lodgment immediately. If a valid Nomination application was lodged, you can lodge the Visa application immediately using the nomination TRN. If you have only submitted “a few forms” you will need to supply a lot more documenation for the Nomination application.

It is part of the Migration Agent details section. Yes, I have done many. All ENS applications since 1 July 2012 have been under the new (e plus) electronic lodgment system.

From a 186 Nomination application lodged on line today. DRC.bmp DRC.bmp

Gaining approval to sponsor overseas workers is only stage 1 of a 3 stage process. The chance of success for this first application will be entirely dependant on whether the company meet the requirements, which is something you as the visa applicant cannot know or assume. It depends on the specific circumstances and whether the company, the position offered and you and your husband meet all of the requirements. That will depend on a number of circumstances including where you have lived and traveled in the last five years. I never recommend that applicants make any irreversible decisions, especially large ones such selling a home or leaving a job, until the visa has been approved. Considering that the company has not even been approved to sponsor and your visa application has not even been lodged I believe your planning is premature. If the company is using an Agent to lodge all of the applications, you should at least have them assess your matter to determine if your husband even meets the visa requirements.

An incorrect ANZCO code would not make a nomination invalid. If the nomination was invalid, the visa application would also have been invalid and no fee charged. But the nomination approval specifies an occupation which directly relates to ANZCO. If you don’t withdraw you will have the right of appeal, however, does the case stand any chance of success at MRT? I would recommend that you obtain some professional advice before you undertake a review process which will be expensive, time consuming and potentially leave you in a worse visa situation than you currently are.

You can not apply to the MRT to review a decision if there is no decision to review.

They are not part of the same system. Vetassess is an “independent” and “impartial” authority which has simply been nominated as the relevant authority for certain occupations. Their systems are in no way linked to the Immigration Department systems. I agree that it is frustrating that the assessment from the relevant Authority nominated by DIAC, does not provide assessment results which are consistent with DIAC requirements.

There has been an increase to the Temporary Skilled Migration Income Threshold (TSMIT). This does not automatically mean that your sponsor must raise your salary as their obligations are linked to the Market Rate that would be paid to an equivalent Australian.

Unfortunately this is a common enquiry and reason for visa refusal under the Expression of Interest system. If on lodging the visa you are assessed as not having the same amount of points as claimed in your EOI, the visa application will be refused, even if you still meet the pass mark. The issue of “equivalent” qualifications and “skilled” employment experience are becoming increasingly problematic with regular changes to assessing criteria as well as Migration Policy.

I was simply answering the original question of the OP as to the reason for the high cost of a CPV. There is research to show that the fee paid is minimal compared, on average to what each person will actually cost the tax payer over their lifespan. You seem to have taken this personally based on your personal experience. If you believe that someone who only commences paying tax once they retire to Australia, is actually funding their own Medicare and other social costs, you are entitled to that opinion, but I disagree based on my experience. My personal experience, having been involved with many CPV applications, is that applicants’ will survive on modest savings (usually from the sale of their home) and help from family until they are able to claim an Australian pension. If the Government was actually making money on CPV’s they would not cap the program.

I don’t think that you can compare the tax contribution of someone who migrates here at age 60 or later and only possibly begins paying tax in Australia from that point, to the tax contribution of someone who has worked their whole adult life in Australia. Yes, in some instances some Contributory Parent Visa holders may pay some tax in Australia. The point is however, that the benefit they gain will far outweigh the short term tax contribution they may make.

The bridging visa is issued immediately upon valid lodgement, not when a case officer is assigned. If your son has not been notified of; a) valid visa lodgment and b) grant of a bridging visa, he should follow this up urgently.

Although this is correct in many instances, not so for the bridging visa associated with a Subclass 189, as this bridging visa has NIL conditions.

If you do the math it’s actually very cheap for what you get. A Parent who is granted a CPV will get Permanent residency which gives them instant healthcare for the rest of their life and eventually a Pension if they qualify, even though they have never paid tax in Australia. As most applicant’s are past working age, they may never pay any tax in Australia, yet they will receive the same benefits as someone who has paid tax all of their life. If you consider the cost of health care for say 20 to 30 years you will see it is a bargain for those who can afford the upfront cost.

It will depend on the specific subjects studied. There is no yes or no answer simply based on the fact that you have completed a BCom.

You are so quick to pass judgment based on a few lines of text. Without knowing the details of the case, the specific advice or the context it was given, you have judged the advice as incorrect and labeled the agent as a “so called” migration expert. Yet you believe that you are in a better position to give advice based on minimal information and as such proclaiming yourself as an expert. Do you think that it is at all possible that this is the advice they were given, by being told that the Marriage Certificate alone is not enough? I am the first to agree that some agents give bad advice, however, I find the constant vilification of Agents on this form by some member’s very distasteful.

As you will be getting married shortly before lodging your visa application, the Marriage certificate by itself will not suffice, as you will still need to provide documentation to evidence a continuing and genuine relationship. If your agent is stating that you still need to meet 12 months of co habitation after being married, I would question that advice. If however, they are advising that you still need to provide documents that you are in a genuine relationship, then they are correct. You do not need to provide any documents when lodging an EOI.

This is a complex matter which you should really discuss any questions with your agent/lawyer. I do not believe a public forum is the appropriate place to ask advice on such a complex issue. If you do not trust the advice from your agent/lawyer you should seek a second opinion. Going off shore to lodge the subclass 457 add on application to avoid Section 48 of the Migration Act, may not necessarily solve your problems, as you will still need to meet Schedule 3 requirements before visa grant if you are on shore.

There is no truth to full time requirement being dropped on 1 July, as there never was a full time requirement. The issue is Market rate and TSMIT. If the salary does not meet these requirements (irrelevant of hours) then the application cannot be approved. Furthermore, if candidates already hold a 457 visa, they cannot vary the conditions without lodging a new nomination.

There were a lot of system problems with the DIAC lodgement system at the end of June, so it is not unusual that your agent was forced to lodge a paper application. Currently 457 processing is slow for applications lodged before the 1st of July due to the many changes that were introduced. As such both e-lodge and paper are moving slowly.

If you are not sure if you want to live in Australia forever, you should look at the subclass 173 Temporary Contributory Parent Visa. This is cheaper than the permanent version and lets you stay in Australia for two years. If you then decide to stay permanently you can apply for the Permanent Contributory Parent Visa.

It is unlikely that the same Regulations and points system will still be in effect by 2015 when you are looking at applying for PR. The Subclass 190 visa may not even exist by then and may have been replaced by something completely different, as we have seen in the past. It is very difficult to make such long term plans based on an ever changing Australian visa system. On the bright side, nursing has traditionally been a good occupation for migration.

Based on the above, no. Correct. · Yes, but you will still need to evidence a genuine and ongoing relationship. · Correct, but there is a difference between “being together” and cohabiting in a de facto relationship.

The ENS processing is starting to gain momentum although processing times are still a bit erratic. As a guide I have had approvals recently ranging from 6 weeks from date of lodgement (nom and visa) up to about 5 months.