Help with parent visa, which one?!

[raweggs]

Hi all, fairly new here, I used to be on here but my login didn't work.

I'm hopefully getting my 801 visa approved soon, and I would like to bring my dad (78yo) out to stay permanently with me and my partner. My mum/his wife has recently passed away, and now he's very lonely. 

I'm reading the parent visa pages on the home affairs website, but I'm not sure his application would be successful, which ever visa he'd choose. My main concerns are... he has 3 children, and only I live in Aus. One is a half sibling to me. My other concern is that I have a low income, and therefore I'd worry I wouldn't be approved as his sponsor. And the last worry is that he's no in A1 health, nothing major, but he has rheumatoid arthritis and type2 diabetes, would this not pass the health requirements?

Any help appreciated. If we can't do a permanent visa, we might just bring him out for a few months, but then he'd be upset to have to go home to an empty house. He hasn't much family in the UK, and essentially no friends anymore.

[Quoll]

Not really going to meet the criteria on the grounds you have suggested (balance of family and health!). Why tease him with a trip knowing it will just reinforce what he can’t have. If he could cope with coming and going for the odd holiday then, fine, but if he wouldn’t cope, don’t do it. Perhaps you could encourage your siblings to step up to fill any void you might leave in his life or maybe talk to him about supported accommodation in his own community - a lot of folk my age are happily opting for that. They still retain their independence but have a ready made supportive social network to fall back on. Failing that, delay your own move until he’s popped his clogs if you think he won’t cope without you.
Moving to the other side of the world as an aged person isn’t easy, in fact it’s quite cruel because getting settled in a foreign country is bloody hard work and isn’t a magical answer to life’s ills especially as you’re effectively isolating the oldie from a life long social network.

[raweggs]

I already live in Australia. I have a sister who lives nearby to him. I haven't teased him at all, it was his idea and so I said I'd look into it for him. He will probably just come and visit for a few months instead.

I think it would be too much for him moving there, personally. It's stressful enough doing it at half his age. 

I was surprised to see some parent visas can take 30yrs, and some cost over $30k!

[Ausvisitor]

I mean $30k is cheap to accept someone into the country who will use services but is no longer working so won't be paying income tax.

It seems like a lot but they get a huge amount in return.

[raweggs]

Yeah very good point. Shame I don't earn more, then I think I'd have a better chance getting him out, but I can tell it'd be a long hard process, with 50% or less chance of being successful. It has been doing my partner visa and caused a lot of stress. 

I just had always hoped to get both my parents out of the UK, but alas, life never goes the way you want it to.

Thanks for the replies.

[Marisawright]

37 minutes ago, raweggs said:

Yeah very good point. Shame I don't earn more, then I think I'd have a better chance getting him out, but I can tell it'd be a long hard process, with 50% or less chance of being successful. 

Actually you've got it back to front.  If a parent is eligible for a parent visa and is in reasonable health, the chances of success are almost 100%.  Nothing to do with how well-off you are.  The problem is the parent being eligible in the first place.   As Quoll says, because your Dad has other children, he's not eligible, so he can't even apply.  

The reality is that it wouldn't be practical even if he was eligible, because he'd struggle financially.  For one thing, his pension would be frozen at the amount he's receiving when he leaves the UK.  He'd never get any of the annual increases and he'd lose his pension credits.    Also, in the UK, I assume he's getting his arthritis and diabetes medications free?   Here, he'd have to pay for prescriptions, and that can mount up. No free bus pass either!  

57 minutes ago, raweggs said:

I just had always hoped to get both my parents out of the UK, but alas, life never goes the way you want it to.

I wish the Australian government was more honest about parent visas.  When someone is considering moving to Australia, they should be made aware that their chances of bringing their parents are very low. The government doesn't want elderly parents, because they cost the taxpayer so much money in medical and aged care services.  In fact they've tried to get rid of some parent visas altogether, but they couldn't get that through Parliament.  So instead, they've just set a very small quota each year that can be granted, and that has created a very long waiting list.  Currently less than 10,000 parent visas are granted every year, and there are 150,000 applications in the queue.

[Alan Collett]

There's a long term (3 years or 5 years) sponsored temporary subclass 870 visa, which doesn't have a balance of family test.

However, you need to have been residing in Australia for 4 years to sponsor, there's an income test for the sponsor to satisfy (can combine your taxable income with that of a spouse or partner), there's likely to be a real issue when renewing the 870 visa (usually need to be outside Australia for a continuous period of at least 90 days), and there's a maximum period of stay in Australia on an 870 visa of 10 years.

So this visa subclass is definitely not a panacea, but is mentioned here for completeness ...

Best regards.

[Judy]

6 hours ago, Ausvisitor said:

I mean $30k is cheap to accept someone into the country who will use services but is no longer working so won't be paying income tax.

It seems like a lot but they get a huge amount in return.

Don't assume that all seniors don't pay income tax. 

[Marisawright]

6 hours ago, Ausvisitor said:

I mean $30k is cheap to accept someone into the country who will use services but is no longer working so won't be paying (much) income tax.

It seems like a lot but they get a huge amount in return.

Actually the Contributory Parent Visa costs a lot more than that, but they do still get their money's worth in medical and aged care.  Research shows that the average parent, on a parent visa, costs the Australian taxpayer around $350,000. 

Some may think that sounds ridiculous.  However just one hip replacement costs the government about $30,000.  Many pensioners are on several medications (blood pressure, arthritis, diabetes) so prescription costs alone can run into thousands. And of course, though we don't like to think about it, we're all going to die of something, and often that means expensive treatments for cancer, end of life care etc. So you can see why the government only wants parents who are able to pay their way.

[ramot]

7 hours ago, Ausvisitor said:

I mean $30k is cheap to accept someone into the country who will use services but is no longer working so won't be paying income tax.

It seems like a lot but they get a huge amount in return.

We certainly paid $50,000 each for our visa 7 years ago, don’t know if it’s gone up since, and trust me we pay tax, might be retired but certainly have income, not sure how we would survive otherwise. Our visa was slightly different, but the normal parent visa has very little access to help for their first  10 years here.

No one is breaking any rules, if there is a visa there that gives you the right to live here, then you can’t complain if it costs the country money.

there is obviously a mix of parents who come here, but many of us come having sold a property and with pensions, so we can afford private health, and buy a house.

[Marisawright]

1 hour ago, ramot said:

No one is breaking any rules, if there is a visa there that gives you the right to live here, then you can’t complain if it costs the country money.

No one has suggested anyone is breaking any rules.  I simply pointed out why the government makes it so difficult for parents to get in.

[Ausvisitor]

3 hours ago, Judy said:

Don't assume that all seniors don't pay income tax. 

I didn't, I was making a comment in relation to the circumstances described by the OP.

Or do we now have to put in caveats for every special interest group and edge case every time we respond? If that is the case I would draw your attention to the fact that your post made no mention of the many seniors that don't pay tax (see it's pretty tedious when people make comments that are blatantly not relevant to the point made isn't it!!)

[raweggs]

5 hours ago, Alan Collett said:

There's a long term (3 years or 5 years) sponsored temporary subclass 870 visa, which doesn't have a balance of family test.

However, you need to have been residing in Australia for 4 years to sponsor, there's an income test for the sponsor to satisfy (can combine your taxable income with that of a spouse or partner), there's likely to be a real issue when renewing the 870 visa (usually need to be outside Australia for a continuous period of at least 90 days), and there's a maximum period of stay in Australia on an 870 visa of 10 years.

So this visa subclass is definitely not a panacea, but is mentioned here for completeness ...

Best regards.

Unfortunately mine and my partners income doesn't come close to the $84k minimum. So i cannot be a sponsor. My dad would of sold his house, and he gets company and state pensions, which he has to pay tax on anyway. It's ridiculous.

He could buy the same size property in Australia with half of the sale value of his current house in the UK. 

Either way, it's not possible. He'll just come for a long holiday. 

[ramot]

2 hours ago, Marisawright said:

No one has suggested anyone is breaking any rules.  I simply pointed out why the government makes it so difficult for parents to get in.

Sorry wasn’t replying to you Marisa, and a bad use of words. I was trying to say if a visa has no restrictions, then despite criticism of the potential cost to the country, they are entitled to all it offers, 
There was an inference that parents coming here on a parent visa, had no money or income so wouldn’t be paying any tax, but getting everything free. 
I do agree that we as we age we do need more medical help, and there is an imbalance to the amount the visa costs, but it’s up to the government to change it.
I wonder if one day the visa will include the condition of health insurance? 

 

Edited November 27 by ramot

[Marisawright]

29 minutes ago, ramot said:

Sorry wasn’t replying to you Marisa, and a bad use of words. I was trying to say if a visa has no restrictions, then despite criticism of the potential cost to the country, they are entitled to all it offers, 
There was an inference that parents coming here on a parent visa, had no money or income so wouldn’t be paying any tax, but getting everything free. 

Well, that is exactly what some parents are able to do, under the current setup (especially with the current ability to come here on a bridging visa and stay for years).  Ausvisitor was just stating a fact, NOT saying whether it was right or wrong.  As you say, it's up to the government to change it, but they're scared it would be politically unpopular -- and that's why (like I said), they are taking the cowardly way out and extending the waiting period for years and years.

I'd much rather the government was honest and just increased the fees to cover the costs they're incurring, OR make the parental visas like the old 410.  Either of those would be more honest. 

Edited November 27 by Marisawright

[Ken]

17 hours ago, ramot said:

I wonder if one day the visa will include the condition of health insurance? 

 

Not unless the health insurance industry plays ball. Health insurance can be required for people who only have a visa to be in the country for a year because the health insurance industry is set up for policies of that length, but a health insurance policy that covers the rest of your life would be required for permanent visas and nobody offers those policies.

[Tulip1]

19 hours ago, ramot said:

I wonder if one day the visa will include the condition of health insurance? 

It would be impossible to impose it.  Easy at the start but how would they be checking that old people have kept their health insurance policy live over the many years.  Many would stop paying simply because with the ever increasing costs associated with ageing health cover it would become unaffordable.  What then happens to all those old people who no longer have cover when they need high cost help.  They won’t be tossed to the kerb, they would be helped.  I just can’t see it being policed to ensure insurance for life is in place.   

[Marisawright]

2 hours ago, Ken said:

Not unless the health insurance industry plays ball. Health insurance can be required for people who only have a visa to be in the country for a year because the health insurance industry is set up for policies of that length, but a health insurance policy that covers the rest of your life would be required for permanent visas and nobody offers those policies.

It's not so much that.  There was a 410 visa, under which people had to have full medical cover -- and there is a policy (the Overseas Visitor policy) which offers that. It is an annual policy but the visa provisions allowed for the visa to be cancelled if it wasn't maintained, I believe.  If they could do it then, they could do it now.  I don't know why they've chosen not to. 

[Ken]

1 hour ago, Marisawright said:

It's not so much that.  There was a 410 visa, under which people had to have full medical cover -- and there is a policy (the Overseas Visitor policy) which offers that. It is an annual policy but the visa provisions allowed for the visa to be cancelled if it wasn't maintained, I believe.  If they could do it then, they could do it now.  I don't know why they've chosen not to. 

The 410 visa was a temporary visa. Entirely different kettle of fish.

[ramot]

34 minutes ago, Ken said:

The 410 visa was a temporary visa. Entirely different kettle of fish.

Although a temporary visa, it was intended as a long term temporary retirement visa, and the visa term was extended from an original 3years? to renewed every 10 years, and renewing was just a tick in a box. It was a good visa in some ways, we were on it for 17 years, and know many who have been on much longer,  you had to be totally self funded, and had to have health cover renewed annually. It was cancelled to new applicants in 2005? What caught most people out after living here a very long time, was the very high increase in the cost of the health cover and the increase in the cost of living, while income didn’t increase much, and if you wanted to move house, as temporary residents the increased charges.also sadly there was a lot of rorting of the visa. 
I agree I doubt you can attach health cover to the permanent parent visa, but the 410 visa gave many of us a chance to live long term in Australia, if you could afford it and also didn’t have children here.

[Marisawright]

1 hour ago, Ken said:

The 410 visa was a temporary visa. Entirely different kettle of fish.

Well, make the parent visas temporary as well, conditional on having insurance each year just like the 410.  It would mean more administration, of course, which is probably why they can't be bothered.

[Ken]

On 28/11/2024 at 18:11, Marisawright said:

Well, make the parent visas temporary as well, conditional on having insurance each year just like the 410.  It would mean more administration, of course, which is probably why they can't be bothered.

The problem will be at the point when they can no longer afford to renew their health insurance they'll be assessed as too unwell to travel, so can't be deported.

Besides do you really want a situation where elderly and infirm people who've been living in Australia for decades are being deported to countries where they don't know anyone and don't have anyone to care for them?

Edited Sunday at 04:47 by Ken