Parent & CP Visas

[Guest Gollywobbler]

Hi all

I've just lifted the following extract out of the DIAC annual report for 2006/7. Unfortunately, all that it does is to confirm the advice which Alan Collett and other Agents started to give about 7 or 8 months ago.

Here are the Official Words, though, anyway:

***************************

Parent visas

All 1000 places available in the non-contributory parent category were filled in 2006-07. The contributory parent migration category came into effect on 27 June 2003 and there were 3500 visas granted in this category in 2006-07.

The category was capped for the first time in June 2006. In 2007-08 there will again be 4500 visa places available – 1000 in the parent category and 3500 in the contributory parent category.

Processing times for the offshore contributory parent category visas did not meet published performance standards through 2006-07. The number of applications received by the Perth Offshore Parents Centre (POPC) have more than doubled in three years (from about 3000 cases in 2005 to more than 7000 cases at June 2007) and the average application rate is 325 cases (525 people) per month. With only 3500 visa places available under the programme, POPC faced a rapidly increasing workload and consequent backlog.

The department responded to this situation by putting in place a number of revised management practices to ensure smarter processing, including restructuring POPC and introducing streamlined processing methods to improve productivity and efficiency.

The expected gains did not show immediately and it will take some time for these measures to take effect and catch up with on-hand applications.

**************************

I presume that bundling Parent and CPV applicants into the backlog at the LCU is part of the new "streamlined processing methods". :no:

Cheers

Gill

[Guest Scardycat]

Thanks for that Gill, I'm just gonna trust to fate and hope that by the time it's my turn, they will be so streamlined and efficient, having had enough time to practice, that I can sail through as if on golden wings. What do you reckon on my chances????????

 

regards

 

Cat

[Guest Gollywobbler]

Hi Cat

Happy Crimble, New Year etc.

 

I had an e-mail from someone yesterday telling me that her Agent has said that the LCU is curetnly processing PR meds received on 27th ovember. If so, they have managed to cut a 13 week backlog which built up during the summer down to about 2 weeks now, which is bearable.

 

However, when the backlog was at its worst, Alan Collett contacted some senior DIAC people to discover the reason forthe delay. He was told it ws because of a whole load of meds for people who had applied for Student visas. The courses were due to start during September, so the Students were getting priority on meds-processing, holding all other applicants up. Eventually the LCU got some extra staff who have been workig all week and all weekend to try to catch up, but I don't know what will happen prior to September 2008.

 

In some ways, the streamlining of the POPC, hinted at in the DIAC report, does seem to be working. Not long ago, the wait for a CO had reached about 10-11 months after lodgement. Caz Beckham then heard from her CO after 9 months, the Bond has been paid and with the Meds backlog dramatically reduced too, I aree with Caz: I think she & Baz might well have their visas by the end of Jan, meaning that the whole process for their CP 143 will have taken just under a year.

 

There have been two or three "Got a CO" posts from CP applicants since Caz's. The later people are reporting hearing from the CO 7 & 7.5 months after lodgement, which is back to 2005-ish timelines The POPC really do seem to be clipping along briskly with granting visas as well.

 

In or about early June 2007, the POPC announced that DIAC had run out of Parent & CP visas forthe 2006/7 Program Year and would be unable to grant any more until 1st July.

 

The figures reported by DIAC indicate that that will definitely happen again in 2007/8. I think the only question is exactly when they will cap the visas and decline to grant any more. The don't seem to me to be trying to pace the rate of grants so as to eke out the supply of these visas for as long as they can.

 

Instead, they seem to be saying, "For as long as we have a supply, we will not waste time about meeting demand. When the supply runs out, grants will stop for as long as is necessary."

 

I think we just need to wait and see what they actually do in the next few months.....

 

Best wishes

 

Gill

[Guest Scardycat]

Thanks for that Gill, it does seem a bit more encouraging, will keep fingers crossed, they will probably have knit together by the time I get a shot at it.

 

Wishing you a very very Happy New Year.

 

Cat

[Guest Gollywobbler]

Hi Cat

 

Happy New Year to you too.

 

Are you the lady who posts as Dizzy dame on British Epats? If you are, this thread is conhusing all ofthe contributors to it:

 

Parent visa question - Page 3 : British Expat Discussion Forum

 

If you want help to follow the arguments properly, please let me know.

 

Best wishes

 

Gill

[Guest nikkiw]

Hi,

 

We are due to settle in perth june 08 hopeing to bring mum over soon after via a last remaining relative visa any pointers would be appreciated - p.s. initial 2 years would be on a visiting visa app so i know she would need to come back to the uk before applying for permant visa

[Guest Gollywobbler]

Hi,

 

We are due to settle in perth june 08 hopeing to bring mum over soon after via a last remaining relative visa any pointers would be appreciated - p.s. initial 2 years would be on a visiting visa app so i know she would need to come back to the uk before applying for permant visa

 

Hi Nikki

 

Errrm....

 

Parents are specifically excluded from eligibility for the Remaining Relative visa, chooks, so Plan A is a non-starter. Please see here:

 

Remaining Relative Visa (Offshore) (Subclass 115)

 

A non-dependent child of 18 or over can sometimes join a Parent via a Remaining Relative visa but not the other way around, unfortunately. :no:

 

It is also not possible to get a tourist visa which permits a 24 month stay in Australia. Doesn't matter how you try to cut that - the idea does not work. Nothing in the legislation or the Policy is capable of making it work, chooks. :no:

 

Is it the case that your Mother would not be eligible for Parent migration because of the Balance of Family Test? In that event, is there any chance that she might be able to afford an Investor Retirement visa instead? Please see here:

 

Investor Retirement (Subclass 405)

 

I am very, VERY sorry to be the one to have to bring you such unwelcome news, honey.

 

Hugz

 

Gill :sad:

[Guest maxxangel]

Hi Gill,

 

Just trying to figure out the difference between the Parent Visa and the Contributory Parent Visa. Is it just the cost?

Cara

[Guest Scardycat]

Hi Cat

 

Happy New Year to you too.

 

Are you the lady who posts as Dizzy dame on British Epats? If you are, this thread is conhusing all ofthe contributors to it:

 

Parent visa question - Page 3 : British Expat Discussion Forum

 

If you want help to follow the arguments properly, please let me know.

 

Best wishes

 

Gill

 

 

Hi Gill

 

Good bit of detective work:policeman:, yes that is me, I follow everything about parent visas, have got a rough plan in mind and hoping it will work, but advice and opinions are always welcome. The plan so far is to apply for a 12 month visa, let my house out while away, come back to UK after the 12 months spend a couple of months here, then dependant on daughters situation, ie, jobs houses etc; either apply for temp CPV (that way no assurer needed) and visitor at same time or if can't prove they are settled apply for a 6 or 12 month visitor, which ever they will give me. Then would have to apply for CPV as soon as can.

 

Then the plan gets kind of hazy, as a lot depends on when I can apply for CPV, so many ifs and buts, the way I see it, it's going to be a case of taking whatever actions are appropriate at the time, but know that its not going to be easy. At some point am going to have to sell the house but don't want to do that until I have applied for CPV, so will have to come back to UK for that, but don't want to go backwards and forwards too often because of the cost. the more I think about it the more it becomes a nightmare, my daughters got a lot to answer for, bless them!!! (thats just in case they read this) Just keep telling self, will all be worth it in the end:yes:

 

I want a fairy godmother:biglaugh:

 

regards Cat

[Guest Gollywobbler]

Hi Gill,

 

Just trying to figure out the difference between the Parent Visa and the Contributory Parent Visa. Is it just the cost?

Cara

 

Hi Cara

 

It isn't only the cost.

 

With a non-contributory Parent visa, the Bond is currently only $5,000 for a couple and the Assurance of Support only lasts for two years, as opposed to $14,000 and 10 years for the CP visa. With both categories, the Parent cannot claim the Australian Aged Pension (ie the State Pension) until 10 years after the visa is first granted.

 

The AoS issue is quite significant especially if the Parent does not have a reasonably good income.

 

Let us say that a penniless Parent, from a country with no Welfare State, eventually gets a non-contributory Parent visa and moves to Oz. For the first 2 years, any money that this Parent claims from Centrelink will be clawed back from the Bond and if that is not sufficient to cover the whole debt, Centrelink can and will chase the Assurers for the rest.

 

However, this stricture falls away after 2 years, and the non-Contributory Parent can then claim Income Support (the Ozzie equivalent thereof) until such time as s/he can claim the Australian Aged Pension instead. The restrictions bind the CPV holder and his/her Assurers for 10 years, so the family gets zilch help from the State for a lot longer than with the non-contributory visa.

 

As against that, the family can confidently expect to wait for around 15 yaers before a non-contributory Parent visa will be granted. The meds are assessed early on, before the applicant is allowed to join the official Queue. They meds are then required again shortly before the visa is granted. There is a substantial risk that something will go wrong with the health of one of the Parents during the inordinately long wait and if one fails the Meds, neither will get the visa. By cutting down the wait very substantially, the CP visa does tend to guard against this risk.

 

Let us say that a British couple, both currently aged 45, have a 22 year old child who has married an Australian Citizen. (For simplicity, this is the couple's only child.) The Parents both work full-time in the UK and have no plans to retire much before reaching 65, plus they are currently in good health.

 

Because their jobs would resrict how much time they can spend in Australia pre-retirement, this couple does not necessarily want a Parent visa within the next couple of years because the Australia Govt would expect them to make a permanent move to Oz within 5 years of the grant of a CP 143 visa. If not, there could well be hassle with Resident Return visas later on etc.

 

The British couple are both still pretty young. If they apply for a non-contributory Parent visa, it will string things out till they are ready to retire, plus the costs will be minimal once they are ready to retire. There may be advantages for them in taking the long-winded route, even though the health risk cannot be ignored.

 

It is a very, very individual decision which the family alone has to make - assuming that they are sufficiently well-heeled to have a choice about which of the visas to go for.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

[Guest nikkiw]

Gill,

 

Will be having a word with my agency as my mother eventually being in oz permantly is a big factor, they told me that after 2 years of me being in oz I have the option of using a last remaining relative visa the cost of 'buying my mum in' as quoted would be approx £15,000 sterling so am now very confused, any further advise before ringing agency would be greatly appreciated.

 

In the 2 year interim she would first get a 12 month visitors visa then return back to the uk for approx 3 months then apply for a second 12 month visitors visa.

i.e mum aged 61 and has her own private pension

[Guest Gollywobbler]

Hi Gill

 

Good bit of detective work:policeman:, yes that is me, I follow everything about parent visas, have got a rough plan in mind and hoping it will work, but advice and opinions are always welcome. The plan so far is to apply for a 12 month visa, let my house out while away, come back to UK after the 12 months spend a couple of months here, then dependant on daughters situation, ie, jobs houses etc; either apply for temp CPV (that way no assurer needed) and visitor at same time or if can't prove they are settled apply for a 6 or 12 month visitor, which ever they will give me. Then would have to apply for CPV as soon as can.

 

Then the plan gets kind of hazy, as a lot depends on when I can apply for CPV, so many ifs and buts, the way I see it, it's going to be a case of taking whatever actions are appropriate at the time, but know that its not going to be easy. At some point am going to have to sell the house but don't want to do that until I have applied for CPV, so will have to come back to UK for that, but don't want to go backwards and forwards too often because of the cost. the more I think about it the more it becomes a nightmare, my daughters got a lot to answer for, bless them!!! (thats just in case they read this) Just keep telling self, will all be worth it in the end:yes:

 

I want a fairy godmother:biglaugh:

 

regards Cat

 

Hi Cat

 

I think your plan is very sensible and you have developed a good, clear grasp of the considerations involved.

 

You are quite right. The only way to devise the best strategy for yourelf is to do it as you go along, based on the facts as they develop as time goes on.

 

There is no need for you to come back to the UK in order to sell your house unless you want to be here during that period. I've bought and sold DOZENS of houses for clients who were not in the UK during the transaction. The Agents, international removals and the solicitors between them can EASILY deal with the whole bang shoot by themselves.

 

You are also absolutely right to read everything you can lay your hands on about Parent migration.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

[Guest nikkiw]

Any comments on the below option :-

 

I have been looking into this subject. My parents fall into the aged parent visa category. I was advised by DIAC to get them over here on a visitor ETA that has no restrictions on extensions then apply for an 804 by completing forms 40 (me) and 47PA (them). The wait time could be 10 years but atleast they would be enjoying life here.

 

Many Thanks anxious Nikki

[Guest Gollywobbler]

Nikki, Nikki, Nikki!!!

 

Please keep your hair on, poppet!

 

You mentioned the Remaining Relative visa, so I thought that was what you meant!

 

The only visa that costs about £15,000 per parent is the Contributory Parent Visa. Your Agent is on the right track, so you have nothing to fear, chicken!

 

Your second post today talks about the sc 804 Aged Parent visa. That is a slightly different issue.

 

Right now, I'm starving and our meal is ready. I'm going to grab a bite and then I'll come back and send you a detailed reply.

 

But please don't worry!!

 

Hugz

 

Gill

[Guest Gollywobbler]

Gill,

 

Will be having a word with my agency as my mother eventually being in oz permantly is a big factor, they told me that after 2 years of me being in oz I have the option of using a last remaining relative visa the cost of 'buying my mum in' as quoted would be approx £15,000 sterling so am now very confused, any further advise before ringing agency would be greatly appreciated.

 

In the 2 year interim she would first get a 12 month visitors visa then return back to the uk for approx 3 months then apply for a second 12 month visitors visa.

i.e mum aged 61 and has her own private pension

 

Hi Nikki

 

Your mother would not be using a remaining relative visa in the situation which you describe. She would be using a Contributory Parent visa instead. This is where the confusion has crept in, hon, so there is nothing whatever to worry about.

 

Yes, Mother could apply for a couple of long-stay tourist visas whilst she waits for you to to be considered sufficiently "settled" in Oz to be able to sponsor your mother for a CPV.

 

She could also apply for the CPV and at the same time apply for a further 12 month tourist visa to enable her to spend the processing time for the CP application in Oz.

 

However, whilst DIAC will almost certainly be OK about 12 months the first time Mum goes with you to Oz, and they should be OK about another 12 months when the CPV application goes in, do not make any assumptions about the 2nd tourist visa in the middle, especially with a break of only 3 months before reapplying. DIAC will not tolerate the idea of somebody using repeated long stay tourist visas in order to "live" in Australia full-time (or very nearly so) as opposed to merely"just visiting." The suggestion that you have put forward is too glib to be trusted and may not go like clockwork when push comes to shove.

 

Scardycat is on the right track. You have to play it by ear and be careful to wear ballet shoes rather than hob-nailed boots where long stay tourist visas are concerned. There is no "right" to a 12 month stay - it depends entirely on the CO's discretion, so be sure not to rile him by making assumptions about what he might be generous enough to permit.

 

Have your Agents explained to you about the Assurance of Support and the means-test on the Assurer(s) for the CPV? You MUST be 100% clear about the AOS from the very beginning, chooks.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

[Guest nikkiw]

Thanks Gill, wll check out with agent again and do some more homework.

 

Again Many Thannk Nikki hugz

[Guest Gollywobbler]

Any comments on the below option :-

 

I have been looking into this subject. My parents fall into the aged parent visa category. I was advised by DIAC to get them over here on a visitor ETA that has no restrictions on extensions then apply for an 804 by completing forms 40 (me) and 47PA (them). The wait time could be 10 years but atleast they would be enjoying life here.

 

Many Thanks anxious Nikki

Hi again Nikki

 

The above is a hoary old chestnut which crops up on British Expats several times very year. The link to the latest thread on the subject is here:

 

http://britishexpats.com/forum/showthread.php?t=495172

 

I am aware of a British couple (friends of friends) who are currently living in Oz. This couple are in their late 60s, I am told. Vaguely aware of Parent migration, and vaguely aware of tourist visas, but unsure about the intricacies of either, they went out to Oz on 90 day ETAs in order to discuss the possibility of Parent migration face to face with their child in Oz.

 

The child decided to take them to see a Registered Migration Agent to get some advice. The RMA noted that since the Parents were already in Oz, on 90 day ETAs (which cannot attract Condition 8503) and one of the couple at least can satisfy the "Aged" requirement, there was no legal bar to them applying for Aged Parent or Contributory Aged Parent visas. In the circs, the RMA would have been negligent if he had failed to advise about this possibility.

 

One way and another the Parents decided to apply for the Aged Parent visa, I am told. On or soon before the expiration of the original 90 day stay permitted by the ETA, the Agent arranged for DIAC to grant a Bridging Visa A to each of the Parents. The Bridging Visa enables them to remain in Australia lawfully until the eventual outcome of the Aged Parent application is known.

 

I gather that the Parents have been in Oz for around 4 years now, so I would imagine that they have passed the initial Meds and PCCs and have been added to the official Queue for the Aged Parent visa. I think they could find themselves waiting for another 10 years or so before DIAC are ready to begin the final processing of their Aged Parent application.

 

They are both in good health at the moment. Statistically, the chances of them both remaining in good health are quite a lot higher than the chance of one of them becoming seriously ill or infirm, but the latter is nevertheless a risk which should not be ignored. It is possible that come the second lot of meds, during final processing, one of them will be found to have a medical condition that precludes the relevant Parent from being able to meet the health-criteria for permanent Migration.

 

It is also possible that by then the person/people lined up to provide the Assurance of Support may have undergone a change for the worse in his/theirr own circs, meaning that this person/people will prove to be unable to satisfy Centrelink that he/they is/are able to meet the income requirements for giving an Assurance of Support.

 

Presumably the RMA has advised about both of these risks but the clients have decided to take the gamble in the interests of trying to save a significant amount of capital.

 

Presumably the RMA has also further advised them as follows:

 

The holder of any Parent visa has to wait 10 years before becoming eligible for the Australian Aged Pension. This is 10 years from the date of the grant, which might be another 10 years in the coming. If their British State Pension has already been reduced and frozen (as it may have been) then one has to consider what this couple are going to live on for the next 20 years?

 

A Bridging Visa A is usually granted on the same terms as the visa which it replaces – in this case the 90-day ETA. The latter prohibits the visa holder from obtaining any paid work in Australia. It is possible to get special permission from DIAC to work in spite of this, but a rigmarole would have to be gone through with DIAC in order to get the consent.

 

A Bridging Visa A does not permit the holder to come and go from Australia at will. In the event that compelling family reasons overseas (or similar) require one of the Parents to leave Oz temporarily, another type of Bridging Visa is required (could be a Bridging Visa E but I am not sure about which one.) Again, these can be obtained if the circumstances warrant it but it is yet more procedural rigmarole to do it.

 

Personally, I think there is doubt about whether the Reciprocal Health Care Agreement between the UK and Oz covers the Parents in these circumstances. Please see this document:

 

http://www.immi.gov.au/allforms/pdf/1024i.pdf

 

Please read the Medicare section of the information form carefully. It says that applicants for Parent visas are not eligible for Medicare if they are on a Bridging Visa A. A Parent whose main intention is to save money isn’t very likely to want to pay for private medical insurance (with the costs increasing exponentially as the Parent gets older) I wouldn’t have thought.

 

The Reciprocal Health Care Agreement might override DIAC’s claims about this. The information form is intended for people from every country on the planet, very, very few of which have RHCAs with Australia. The RHCA itself is probably a series of documents, which probably fills a sizeable room. I would think that only the people who drafted the various bits of it have any idea of what the fine print in the thing actually says.

 

Medicare provide a summary of the main provisions of the relevant RHCA, which is here:

 

http://www.medicareaustralia.gov.au/public/migrants/visitors/uk.shtml

 

That does not confirm the claim in the DIAC document, but it does not specifically contradict DIAC’s assertion either. What we can be sure of, however, is that the RHCA is intended to protect British visitors to Australia only.

 

British holders of subclass 405 Investor Retirement visas are specifically excluded from the RHCA. The RHCA summary says so. Ergo, what is the status of a British holder of a Bridging Visa A for the purposes of the RHCA? Does the legislation and/or the RHCA recognise him as a “visitor”?

 

Irritatingly, the Migration Regulations do not contain a definition of “visitor.” The nearest they get to providing guidance about this is to define “tourism.” As follows:

tourism means participation in activities of a recreational nature including amateur sporting activities, informal study courses, relaxation, sightseeing and travel.

 

I think it is probable that the relevant definition of “visitor” is contained in the RHCA itself, but without seeing the source material I can’t tell you what the definition might be, nor can any RMA who has not investigated the question specifically. My guess, therefore, is that the average British Parent who embarks on this money-saving idea probably does not get all the advice that he ought to be offered before he makes a decision about which way to jump.

 

I am not convinced that the holder of a Bridging Visa A is a "tourist." However, relying on the idea that the Bridging Via A is granted on the same terms as the original (in this case tourism) visa, he might be. I simply don't know. I think one would have to find out how Medicare - in practice - treat British holders of a Bridging Visa A when the holder has appliedfor a Parent visa.

 

There IS potential upside as well, though. The main feature of the upside is what happens if one of the Parents in my example fails the second lots of meds in a few years’ time. In that event, the sponsoring child can appeal to the Migration Review Tribunal against the visa refusal. He or she can obtain further medical evidence and – for an additional fee – require that the Review Medical Officer of the Commonwealth should advise the Tribunal about whether or not the medical criteria for migration are met in spite of whatever is wrong with the Parent.

 

If the MRT Appeal fails, there is a further right of appeal direct to the Minister for Immi, under S351 of the Migration Act 1958. S351 states that the Minister for Immi – acting alone – may substitute his own decision for that of the MRT if the Minister considers that it is in the public interest to do so. The Minister cannot even be compelled to consider the question but if he decides to, his decision must be in the public interest.

 

It is arguably not in the public interest to cause grave and distressing hardship to members of a family who are lawfully and permanently settled in Australia. The relevant child and his/her family might be forced to leave Australia in order to care for the sick parent in some other country if the Parent cannot remain in Australia. That would be especially unfair on grandchildren who may have been born in Australia, may have been Australian Citizens since birth, and who know no other country as “home.”

 

However, the Minister does have to consider whether the public interest would be served by allowing a Parent with renal failure to have access to, say, regular kidney-dialysis, meaning that an Australian cannot get dialysis as regularly as might be optimal because of the scarcity of the machines and of the medical staff trained to look after dialysis patients.

 

The Minister generally opts for the “greater good” argument of protecting the general public at the expense of the individual family, but that is not really the point of the appeals process from the appellant’s point of view. It might be perfectly obvious that any appeal is bound to fail all the way down the line and every time.

 

However, the appeals process is naturally very slow and with a bit of industry on the part of the appellant’s advisors, it can be made to take much longer than its normal snail’s pace. In short, one can use it to buy time. If the Parent is too sick to pass the meds then five or so years later, the chances are that the Parent will either have died or will have become so ill that no airline or shipping company would agree to carry the Parent out of Australia, for fear of the plane or the ship having to divert for an emergency medical disembarkation. The Australian Government will not pay for a private air ambulance (and even they won’t carry somebody if the patient’s own doctors forbid it.) Meanwhile the family will insist that they cannot afford one themselves and so forth. (If they are brainy they will have seen to it that any medical insurance held does not include air ambulances, obviously.)

 

In reality, the chances of a seriously ill Parent on a Bridging Visa A being forced to leave Australia are not high, contrary to the blood-curdling claims made on some of the forums….

 

So there are pros and cons with the idea, without doubt. The crucial thing, however, is this:

 

The intention to remain in Australia indefinitely must not be formed prior to the Parent’s arrival in Australia on the 90-day ETA. People are entitled to change their minds upon receipt of legal advice post-arrival. DIAC know that they cannot prove exactly when the intention was formed, so they have no alternative but to leave well alone.

 

The only legitimate circs in which a 90 day ETA may be granted are where:

 

976.222 The applicant states an intention only to visit Australia temporarily for tourism purposes.

 

Gossiping publicly on the Web about a possible intention of flouting 976.222 in order to evade Condition 8503 when entering Australia is not the brightest idea a bunny could have, I would suggest, however innocent the question, because DIAC are known to read British Expats and people sometimes – unwittingly – say enough about their own situations, visa applications etc, to enable DIAC to identify the family concerned. ….

 

Cheers

 

Gill

[Guest Shkurka's]

Hi Gill,

Wonder if you can advise.

I have applied for a CP Visa. I was told that my daughter had to be living in OZ for 2 years before we could apply, but in some circumstances you can apply after 3 months. My daughter is married to an australian man, lived in oz for 7 years and is a australian citizen. However, the family moved to the UK for 5 years and only returned in May 07. I applied in Sept 07.

 

Have you come across anyone in this situtation?

 

Thanks Di

[Guest Gollywobbler]

Hi Shkurka's

 

There shouldn't be a problem if your son-in-law is sponsoring your application.

 

Although 2 years is "usually" regarded as a safe bet for somebody who is new to Oz to be considered "settled" in Oz (so as to be a viable Sponsor in a cP application) the rule is that a Australian Citizen returning to Oz is deemed to be "settled" back into Oz after only 3 months back in Oz.

 

There is nothing to worry about, chooks, from what you have said in your post.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

[Guest Shkurka's]

Oh good that's the answer I was hoping for.

It would seem that people are waiting 6 months and more before meds?

We applied in Sept 07 and payment was taken out with in a week does that mean the waiting game for meds has started?

 

Di