SusieRoo

10 minutes ago, tabitha10 said:

sooo my understanding (had a reply from an email i sent)  is that are to do a blitz on temp (173) to perm (143) very soon......yay 

will keep you updated.

Fantastic news!

2 hours ago, clarkesville1 said:

Hi, feel I need to explain my post the other day!!

My daughters friend, who lives in Oz, told me her parents had come out on an investment visa and paid 60k??   It transpires that it was a Parent Visa, over six years ago.   I was getting excited about that, so hopes are now dashed.   Had a telephone conversation with my agent yesterday, so no fast fix, which, I know is what you guys had already said.  Anyhow more positive is that I'm out visiting them in September for a month, they are home for Xmas in UK.   Next year I will start doing the 6 mth there, 6 mth here.   I have just read about the new Qantas Dreamliner direct to Australia in 17 hours and it all looks good, so counting my days till I can hug my daughter and grandsons.

So when it comes to a 60k visa, it sounds like we missed the last train, clarkesville1.

Loved reading the rest of your post, its put me in a happy mood.

"Alexa, play Monkees" (sorry)

2 hours ago, metoyou369 said:

Hello 

I am about to submit my application and would like to ask a few questions for those who has experienced before:

1, For online application, do we need to certified all document? if not, what kind of documents need to be certified?

2, Do we need to submit the application online, before we could submit evidence? 

3, Do Form 80 really need for the visa application?

4, where could i found TRN reference number for my sponsor to complete him application? 

5, can my sponsor complete and submit the sponsor form from my account?

Thanks Sally

Welcome Sally to the PV waiting room.

Step on board, buckle up your seat belt and prepare yourself for an emotional rollercoaster. If Aldi have a special offer on patience, it may be worth stocking up on a few bags (and a case or two of wine).

I agree with AMP, each form has a counterpart set of instructions and these should answer most of your questions. I also think you will need all documents to be certified copies or originals.

Which type a visa are you applying for? You may not need to worry about the form 80 for a while if it’s a 173 or 143 (which are not online applications).

AMP also makes a good point about using an agent, may people successfully gain visas without one, and you will get a lot of help here. We don’t have one, but if starting again I would definitely talk to ‘Go Matilda’ (aka-. Alan Collet on this forum).

Good luck and don’t look back!

13 hours ago, Bear2015 said:

I think the attraction for those 'switching' to the CPV is this part of the auto reply: 

"As an alternative, you may wish to 'switch' to a faster visa processing path, the Contributory Parent visa.  This has significantly higher application charges, but no queue and is therefore, a much quicker pathway to permanent residence."

When they say 'No que' obviously the NCP applicants will want to switch to CPV only to know the length of the que.  Not only that They have to pay the application charges twice , at this rate, the 103s may move faster if everyone starts 'switching' to 143. The heads of the DIBP is  sending  the wrong message and complicating things for themselves (their overworked staff) and everyone else.

Your right Bear2015, it's just a pack of lies to make money. There is no point in swapping from a 103 now, best to stay put and save your $100k, then see what happens in November with the new visas.

Anyone seeing movement?

Online is showing the last 173/143 'case officer' appointed around January. 

Have there been any new 'case officers' allocations in the last 5 months?

1 hour ago, Fisher1 said:

The 103 is an offshore visa. 

Thank you Fisher1 for the info.

I thought this looked too good to be true.

So it's just the aged 804 that's 'on-shore' and qualifies for the bridging visa. Still sounds like a good option for any over 65’s (in fact, there would be little point applying for any other visa). We may still have to consider this if our 173 queue grows much longer.

I would also be interested to hear more about clakesville1’s 60k investment visa.

Hope your move is all going smoothly.

2 hours ago, Alan Collett said:

 

Hi again SusieRoo.

The introduction of a new temporary parent visa would (probably) not have an impact on already lodged 103 and 804 visa applications - so I don't quite follow this point.

Noted re the additional narrative in the PVC auto email, though I'm not sure 103 and 804 visa applicants are seeking out this auto email update quite so frequently as those on this forum.   I may of course be wrong though ...

Best regards.

1 hour ago, SusieRoo said:

 

Thanks Alan, very constructive comments as always.

I think the point I’m trying to make, is – I speculate there is a link between –

      1) Introduction of New Parent Visas

      2) Likelihood of scrapping Non-Contributory Visas

      3) And increased processing times for 143/173’s

I know I am a guessing amateur with too much time on my hands, but it’s hard not to ‘join the dots’ when we have so much at stake.

We just need to understand why processing times have shot up so much in the last month (nearly a year for 173’s).

Shame IMMI can’t make a simple statement.

My apologies Alan, I think I may have misinterpreted your original message.

I was assuming, if non-contributory streams were scrapped, all applicants would be left to find alternatives. But I can see you are saying (probably) the stream would close to new applicants, but existing candidates will be allowed to complete their process.

This makes sense and would of course make a significant difference to how 143/173’s would be impacted.

So, I have now a couple of new questions (sorry to ask but you are the Oracle of the this forum).

If someone applies for an on-shore 103, and then gets a bridging visa. Can they buy a house and work in Australia while waiting? Are there any disadvantages in waiting for years on a bridging visa?

I’m just wondering if there is any benefit in switching (other than saving $100k).

1 hour ago, Alan Collett said:

 

Hi again SusieRoo.

The introduction of a new temporary parent visa would (probably) not have an impact on already lodged 103 and 804 visa applications - so I don't quite follow this point.

Noted re the additional narrative in the PVC auto email, though I'm not sure 103 and 804 visa applicants are seeking out this auto email update quite so frequently as those on this forum.   I may of course be wrong though ...

Best regards.

Thanks Alan, very constructive comments as always.

I think the point I’m trying to make, is – I speculate there is a link between –

      1) Introduction of New Parent Visas

      2) Likelihood of scrapping Non-Contributory Visas

      3) And increased processing times for 143/173’s

I know I am a guessing amateur with too much time on my hands, but it’s hard not to ‘join the dots’ when we have so much at stake.

We just need to understand why processing times have shot up so much in the last month (nearly a year for 173’s).

Shame IMMI can’t make a simple statement.

2 hours ago, Alan Collett said:

I don't see any specific efforts being made by the PVC to encourage the 103 and 804 visa applicants to switch to Contributory Parent visa applications, save for advertising an extended processing time for the non Contributory Parent cases and only making available sufficient visas annually as to achieve the expected outcome.

Best regards.

I hope you are right

But, you have yourself commented on the likelihood of 103/804 visas being replaced by the new parent visa.

And for the last two months IMMI has added to ‘new’ message to their email updates. Which says-

“Note that if switching from a 103 to a 173 or 143 visa your original application lodgement date will be taken into account for your new application thus ensuring that you are not disadvantaged.”

We have also seen IMMI’s global processing page updated this month, to add significantly to CPV processing times.

I hope these things are unconnected, but ‘Sod’ and ‘Murphy’ sit ever-present in this waiting room.  

9 hours ago, Alan Collett said:

The 103 and 804 visa subclasses were closed to new applicants at the end of May 2014 (re-opened in Sept 2014); applications already lodged were unaffected by that hiatus.

Best regards.

Thank you for the explanation,

The big question I’m always asking myself, is – ‘When will we get our visas?’

So I’m trying to work out the potential for further delays, due to cessation of non-contributory’s and parents swapping visa streams. (I fully understand this is fair and legitimate and do not want to cause any bad feelings) But from a personal perspective, it helps with our planning if we are able to anticipate any changes.

It appears IMMI are scaling-up efforts to encourage swapping N-CPV to CPVs without being disadvantaged. Which makes me think 103/804 visas are soon to be scrapped.

The 2016 ‘Productivity Commission Inquiry Report’ showed the pipeline for non-contributory PVs at June 2015 to be 51,191. So with 1500 places per year, it’s now probable 48,000+ applicants pre-date people already queuing for 173/143 visas.

Clearly financial constraints will be the main limiting factor, but if just 15% switched to CPV, it would add 12 months onto existing processing times.

I expect this will be mitigated somewhat by the New Parent Visas, but I do feel for us, it is now reasonable to expect a 40 to 48 month total wait. I know this is not what I want to hear, but we need some stability back in our lives. Working to this new timetable will help my family regain some perspective.

Please someone tell me I’m wrong!

56 minutes ago, Fisher1 said:

They actually discontinued the 103 a while ago and then reinstated it later that same year. I don't think I was ever told the 143 would be 18 months waiting time - I always understood it to be about two years?  We eventually waited three years from our first application because we had waited two years and nine months before we switched. Don't forget that switchers have to pay the first vac all over again so that would probably put some people off, particularly if they were on the 103 because of money issues.

I also don’t think we were ever told 173/143s would be 18 months, I just (foolishly) made the assumption based on the processing times before we applied.

I had not realised you had switched yourselves, and if you don’t mind me asking, were you in the original queue before it closed in 2014? I imagine that must have been a dreadful experience to be suddenly told your visa stream was ending.    

1 hour ago, sharon h said:

Just a quick question if my dad applies for non contributory visa in Australia can he stay while it is processed or does he have to leave as I believe these can take up to 20 years to process and he is 71 now ( we can't afford contributory)

I think your dad can apply for an Aged Non-Contributory Parent Visas (804). Then apply for a bridging visa, which will allow him to stay until the visa is processed.

The border.gov.au website is currently not working, so I can’t check, but I do think you have to apply ‘on-shore’ for these visas (so he would need to be in Australia on a tourist visa when applying).

As discussed earlier, there is some uncertainty to the future of all Non-Contributory Visas. But this is only speculation and nothing official has yet been announced.

There will also be a new type of 3 and 5 year parent visas available from November.

I hope these details are correct, and if not, I’m sure someone will correct me.

I’m feeling depressed!

There is a concern that the Non-Contributory Visas will be scrapped in the next 12 months, with the introduction of the New Parent Visa.

Clearly IMMI is now actively encouraging Non-Contributory’s to switch to the 173/143 queue, without being “disadvantaged”.

It’s worrying to think with an estimated +50k people in pipeline for NCPV’s, it would only need a small percentage making the switch, to add months (or years) onto the waiting times for many of us.

I know this is probably fair and rational for all concerned, but it is so difficult to make plans when the timescale keeps changing. Family, house, jobs, dogs, weddings, holiday plans and everything else is thrown into turmoil each time the goal posts move.

Like most, we started with expectations for an 18 month processing time. I could accept a month or two more, but this is not the right way to treat people.

But what can we do?

Test email today is showing no change again for 173/143's - "We are currently assessing applications lodged up to and including 13 October 2014".

But they have now added the following message,

Not so good for everyone already in the 173/143 queue. 

On 18/06/2017 at 02:27, Bear2015 said:

I am finding it difficult to understand the difference in processing times of the 143 and 173 which was published recently.

143 Contributory Parent (Migrant)		35 Months	39 Months
173 Contributory Parent (Temporary)		41 Months	45 Months

If the total Number of 143/173  visas for a year is 7175, then shoudn't they report both visa types together since it is processed in date order? Or are they having seperate Numbers allocated for 173 and 143 out of the 7175? I am totally confused. I'm sure you guys understand the situation better and could enlight me. 

There are some Oct 2014 parents who have already got case offices this month ( accoding to a south african forum). So are these figures for the NEW applicants , though the DIBP site says current levels ??

 

It is difficult to guess why 173 and 143 streams are now showing 4/6 months difference in processing times.

I can only assume, there has been a lot more parents applying for the 173 in the last month (or is that just wishful thinking?).

We will get a better idea as the new financial year progresses, so it's important to keep the 'GM Visa Tracker' updated.

It's our 15 month 'waiting room anniversary' tomorrow and we had been thinking this marked our half-way point, now it may just be 1/3.

Still, it seems like a good excuse to open a bottle of Aldi's best fizz!

7 hours ago, Kathss56 said:

It would appear to me that IMMI are heading for a compete meltdown with the 355 less staff!

especially when, in Nov, the new temp parent visa starts!

Feeling subdued 

I think I’m also heading for a meltdown and it's not just the weather.

No response to the test email last week, so I guess ‘no change’ again. It would really be good to read some sort of explanation as to why this recent increase in 143 / 173 processing times. (Nudge, nudge IMMI, just in case you read this)

Also, thank you Alan for all the informative posts, and keeping us from going completely bonkers.

Only good news is this lovely sunshine is allowing husband to practice his BBQ skills (more like incineration to me, but it keeps him happy).

1 hour ago, Pertenhall said:

I hope that doesn't happen too much - if at all.  It would certainly make the waiting time for all of us who had applied for 143/173 straight off a lot longer.   I do feel sorry for anyone who may have been preparing to applied on shore for an aged parent visa only for it to be scrapped.

Very well put, we’re all parents and grandparents with a common goal, regardless of which type of visa we have applied for.

I think I can get so caught up in my own worries, it's easy to forget, by having the ability to pay for our visas, we are really the ones jumping the queue.

I just wish immi would be a little bit more transparent when adding a year onto the waiting times.

11 hours ago, Bear2015 said:

I am finding it difficult to understand the difference in processing times of the 143 and 173 which was published recently.

143 Contributory Parent (Migrant)		35 Months	39 Months
173 Contributory Parent (Temporary)		41 Months	45 Months

If the total Number of 143/173  visas for a year is 7175, then shoudn't they report both visa types together since it is processed in date order? Or are they having seperate Numbers allocated for 173 and 143 out of the 7175? I am totally confused. I'm sure you guys understand the situation better and could enlight me. 

There are some Oct 2014 parents who have already got case offices this month ( accoding to a south african forum). So are these figures for the NEW applicants , though the DIBP site says current levels ??

 

Has anyone heard if immi are now allowing 'non-contribution' visa applicants to switch to the CPV queue, without having to go to the back?

21 hours ago, tabitha10 said:

im sorry didnt mean to turn you to the wine !!!

Just a thought.

The 173 visa give us a two year temp residency. And we then have to upgrade to permanent 143 or leave.

What happens if we apply for the 143 but our two years expires before it is processed?

Do you automatically get a bridging visa?

10 minutes ago, tabitha10 said:

*cough*....we applied for our 143, after having had our 173 granted 2015, in November 2016.... not heard a sausage !

I stand corrected, the bad news never stops. Back on the wine today.

30 minutes ago, michaleasmum said:

Hi.

I am now 22months into my CPV application, like many others at the time of application I was told it was 18-24months.  My only daughter is expecting her first baby in Jan, so with a view to getting a 600 I booked a one way flight for end of October, thinking this would give me a bit of leeway, before the CPV was granted. Only  to receive the news a couple of days later, that, processing time had gone up to 39months. I will have to rent out my house to finance the time I am unable to work.

I am very confused over the 600, can you apply for an extension, can you apply for a 3 month tourist visa? My son has applied for his 890(?) visa, so chances are he will be there in  Spring 18.  I will have nothing and no one to come back to UK for. 

Any commiserations, comments will be gratefully received!

Thanks

 

 

 

 

I am not an expert but this is what I understand.

The 600 visa is a tourist visa and there is nothing to stop you having a holiday, while waiting for your cpv. But it's important to be truthful when applying, so not to damage your cpv application.

Several contributors to this forum have successfully used 600 visas in their last few months of queuing for cpv.

It sounds like this would also be a suitable option for you. But it would probably be wise to take professional advise from someone like Alan Collet.

CPV 173 to 143

To follow up on my last post. Anyone know if you have to be on-shore to convert a 173 into a 143?

I assume we need to enter Australia once to officially trigger our 173. Can we then return to the uk and immediately apply for the 143?

2 hours ago, Bear2015 said:

Hi,

My parents have applied for a 173 Visa in Oct 2015 but wants to swap to a 143 visa now. Has anyone recently done a switch from 173 to 143? And will  they loose their place in the que?

Any advice wil be greatly appreciated.

 

 

We would also like to do same. All advise so far is, you end up at the back of the que (just as starting again) but this is not official. 

So I too would be very interested in any information.

We plan on asking immi directly when we get our case officer assigned.

I don't see why it should make any difference as all the forms and processes are the same. It's just the staged 2nd vac payment and the Aos

The good news is the 173 to 143 is normally completed in six months.

3 hours ago, Kathss56 said:

Hi

Please can you give me an idea of costs to ship? My car is about to die on me unfortunately....More problems!!  ?

 Wondering if to buy a nearly new car here and ship over whenever my visa comes!! 

Than you

I think you need to allow £3500 for shipping and all the additional costs, just  to be on the safe side. Husband is now reconsidering taking ours. He thinks he now needs an old Toyota with big wheels to drive on the beach. I'm saying nothing, he's already been though his Harley Davidson phase.

1 hour ago, bry45 said:

Not sure I agree about "Ten Pound Pom" ticket holders being lucky, when they were being offered, the trip involved a two month+ boat trip and worse than that, I assume when the Ten Pound Poms landed, they wouldn't have had the luxury of air conditioning or a car.

I agree it’s important not to trivialise the hardships endured by many Ten Pound Poms.

But would you not swap places today? Roughly £500 (allowing for inflation) for an eight-week cruise and an Australian visa stamp in your passport.  Or $100k and a four-year wait for a CPV.