PaulM

Hi Vyvy - apologies for late reply - I didn't look at the site for a while. I haven't had any response yet, but the original application went by normal post (by mistake) on 8th October. Since I couldn't track it and heard nothing for a few weeks, I repeated the application with an explanatory covering letter and sent that by express post on 12th November. It was received at destination on 16th November. Important to remember to send to the locked bag address and not the street address. I'll post again when/if I hear back from immigration.

Sorry - the formatting went wrong. This should be better. Temporary to Permanent Contributory Parent (143) Contributory Parent (Temp) (173) Contributory Aged Parent (864)* Contributory Aged Parent (Temp) (884)* Parent (103) + Aged Parent (804)** Acknowledge New Application 30 Oct 2021 Queue Assessment N/A Lodged Sep 2018 Lodged May 2019 Visa Assessment Sep 2021 Lodged/Queued up to 31 May 2016 Date Queued up to 31 Oct 2010 * updated 17 Nov 2021

Just FYI. No movement since June 2020.

Temporary to Permanent Contributory Parent (143) Contributory Parent (Temp) (173) Contributory Aged Parent (864)* Contributory Aged Parent (Temp) (884)* Parent (103) + Aged Parent (804)** Acknowledge New Application 30 Oct 2021 Queue Assessment N/A Lodged Sep 2018 Lodged May 2019 Visa Assessment Sep 2021 Lodged/Queued up to 31 May 2016 Date Queued up to 31 Oct 2010 * updated 17 Nov 2021 CORRECT FORMATTING BELOW.

Hi Paul - agree it is down to of you qualify or not under the legislation. I was just being chatty. That said, you must come across cases which are a little grey. In my own case I held a substantive visa when we applied for the 143, whilst my wife's had expired and her next one was when we next came to Aus on holiday. However, the 143 application was joint as is the BVA. The advice I have been given is to apply and explain this as Immi may look kindly on the joint BVA since I (as primary applicant) held a substantive visa at the time in 2016.

Hi Marisa, definitely flights have been possible for some locations at some times, but not always when needed (e.g. towards the end of a visa period) or to where needed, even via hubs. I think that is probably the key point. I think the Aussie taxpayer should be a little more happy with the situation on granting BVA's at this time since such grantees would seem to be net spenders in Aus. The info I found was that Parent Visa applicants are specifically excluded from Medicare whilst on a BVA and medical insurance was needed. For some countries there will be reciprocity agreements, but that will have a degree of offset. There may be some other benefits available, but non I could see looked significant when the context of the numbers of people who would qualify are considered. On the other hand, each person on a BVA will spend on groceries, utilities etc. I suppose everyone will have different circumstances, but some (like me) will also be Aus tax payers as well.

Hi Marisa - There haven't always been available flights. From where I am to where I would be allowed to go there have been times when there were no flights and times when there were but infrequent and impossible to book at the right time. Immigration seem to have kindly taken this into account. Hi Tulip - I not sure fairness comes into it. We have been granted additional visitor 600 visas during Covid. Since the 143 is now able to be granted whilst onshore, then it falls under the provisions for a BVA (as explained to me by my agent following up on advice on this forum). Granting 143 without having to leave Aus makes sense at this time to reduce pressure on travel and quarantine. My own opinion (and yes, perhaps due to my own circumstances) is that if you applied for a 143 in say Feb 2020 and then flew here for a holiday and then remained here since, then a Bridging Visa might be a inappropriate given the approx 15 year wait for the 143. However if (like me) you applied years ago and had some reasonable degree of expectation of a 143 being granted soon, then a Bridging Visa may indeed make sense. I would hope (but not perhaps expect) that Immigration take this into account when looking at the BVA applications. In any case, you need to have applied for the 143 offshore and have really already been onshore on 15th March 2020 (I might be outa bit +/-) when tourism stopped for this to apply. I don't believe that will be many cases. The above said, I note that Vyvy was on a BVE. I didn't know that was possible for a 143 applicant, but then again I don't know Vyvy's personal circumstances. Anyway, I sent an application for me and my wife today for a BVA. We might be lucky and get it, or else we might be applying for another 600 visa in December...

Thanks VyVy - apologies for the typo. I'm looking into it with my agent now.

Yep - cheeky for sure Marisa. Do you have any thoughts on why the processing has been stuck at May 2016 for so long? I find it a bit disconcerting, especially given the numbers in the queue that we all believe to be correct.

Thanks Paul. I'll certainly be looking into it.

Hi VyVy - thanks for your interesting info. My wife and I are currently onshore in Aus on a Visitor (subclass 600) visa and have been here since March 2020 as Immigration kindly granted a second 600 earlier this year valid until end 2021. We'll have to apply for a further 600 at the end of this year assuming our 143's don't come through. A BVB would be much more secure and convenient. Looking at the Immi visa page (and link to the Federal Register of Legislation) for the BVB, it seems it is possible for those who have applied for a (v) a Contributory Aged Parent (Residence) (Class DG) visa., which I think is an 864. Your experience seems to suggest this has been extended to the 143. If so, can i ask how you found this out and applied please? Did you somehow let immigration know you are onshore? Thanks.

Thanks AJM22 for a concise update on where we currently stand. The official processing has been stalled at May 2016 for 16 months now, taking it across the 2021/22 fresh allocation period. Does anybody have any theories (or indeed direct knowledge) as to why? Regarding costs v. contribution, not all parents will arrive intending to live as retirees immediately. Some (like me) would have years of working lives ahead, contributing taxes as they go. That potential contribution diminishes the longer you wait for the visa. I'd float the idea of age-based fee levels or granting dates, though I won't as it probably works for me but I'd find it hard to justify morally. I've also been paying full taxes on properties I own and rent out in Aus...should that be considered a credit against my cost?? (Yes, I'm being a bit cheeky here).

Thanks LindaH27. It will be a huge blow if only June 2016 is processed on the 2021/2022 quota. That would mean May and June 2016 only, so a maximum of 2282 visas issued given some May 2016 were under process in June last year. Waiting another year minimum borders on the inhumane given when we applied the process was quoted as taking 24 months. Do you have a link to the social media post by any chance please?

Thanks LindaH27. The 64 months that is currently being referenced on the Department of Home Affairs website is clearly not good guidance as we all know. We have been waiting since 17 Aug 2016, so currently 61 months and still no word. For fresh applicants now the wait will be 18 years, assuming quotas don't change and everybody who has already applied still goes forward (and, indeed, is still able). There will, of course, be many drop-outs and rejections as people age while their applications are waiting to be processed, but still, 10 years + must be expected. In theory, it would look like we should get our visas in the current years batch as there are 3,739 applications up until the end of Aug 2016. However, I can't remember if the application numbers listed are the number of individuals or the number of applications put in. Anyone know? That could make quite a difference to timelines if there are many couples. There could also be dependents, but I'm doubting there are many given the age cut-off and the length of time in processing.

There doesn't seem to be any movement in granting 143's at the moment (as many have noted). We are currently onshore in Aus (thanks to Covid and the understanding of Immigration in giving us two additional visitor's visas), and grateful to be so. Based on our Application Date of 17th Aug 2016 (and acknowledgement letter dated 19th Aug 2016), together with the outstanding and monthly application figures and the current cap, I had thought we would be asked for additional info etc anytime now and be in the 2021/2022 batch of visas granted. I'm also at an age (55) where working for 10-20 years in Australia is both realistic and probably essential, so would be paying tax etc and contributing to society. I also have a couple of properties I rent out here (plus one we currently live in), so paid the additional taxes as a foreigner on those and pay tax from the first $ on the rental income (I chose to pay that tax here rather than in my previous country of residence as the money was earned here and I felt it showed a commitment to Australia). I say all this by way of illustrating that perhaps an applicant in my shoes is a net contributor rather than cost to Australia. I'm interested in anyone's views on this - am I being wildly optimistic, realistic, or too hard to tell? Do we (as a forum) believe being onshore is a plus? Grateful for any thoughts on this.