applying for visa yourself

[jimmy1977]

Hi,

we considering emigrating to oz , is it better to use an agent for visa , we been given a quote for around 4k (2adults 2 children) but as we wouldnt be going for approx 2yrs was wondering if it worth doing the visas ourselves, was wondering what the cost of this is & how to apply?

Thanks all,

Cheryl :wink:

[pablo]

Hi,

we considering emigrating to oz , is it better to use an agent for visa , we been given a quote for around 4k (2adults 2 children) but as we wouldnt be going for approx 2yrs was wondering if it worth doing the visas ourselves, was wondering what the cost of this is & how to apply?

Thanks all,

Cheryl :wink:

hello cheryl,loads of people on here have done it themselves,all the help and advice you need you will get on here,gill(gollywobbler)seems dead well up on everything and is quick to help,we were cutting it fine because i was coming up to 45 so we used an agent,concept australia in manchester,all my mates used them and got their visas,it cost £1300 for the 2 of us about 15 months ago,4k seems expensive to me,also there is online agents who are cheaper again,anyway good luck

[Guest chidge10]

I started using an agent and found myself doing all the work. I gave them £1,100 for their help for what good it was. if you are thinking of going in 2 years time I would look very hard at doing it yourself, (thats the route I'm taking now) as there is enough info on this website and advice from great people like Gollywobbler, (Gill) to enable you to do it yourself. The hardest bit for me was doing the Vetasses paperwork. If you can get throught that you can certainly do the DIAC paperwork.

Ask for advice though on the site.

[Guest alan_blue]

we did it all ourselves and found it easy to be honest

[Guest golden grahams]

Hi cheryl

i think it is natural to want to use an agent as it is a huge step, we certainly thought about it, and then thought some more, got quotes and then thought some more, but have done it ourselves and am so glad we did, had lots of questions about the visa, and the help on here was excellent,

there is also lots of help on the web.

[Elliott-Family]

Hiya

 

We managed to do ours ourselves, once we sorted out which visa we needed it was all fairly straightforward, the skills assessment was more work than the visa application, we did the visa online and it seemed easier than the paper copy,

Worth looking into and saving the money for something fun, most of the info can be found on the web

 

Good luck

 

Claire

[Alan Collett]

Going it alone is fine - until something goes awry with the processing of your application. Sadly, we are seeing more visa applications in recent months (particularly skilled applications) that have to be followed up because they appear to be falling down the cracks ...

 

This is when having an agent on board who can initiate the necessary follow up at an appropriate level within the relevant processing centre will save a lot of angst and worry.

 

I appreciate that all may go swimmingly - but if not having an agent acting for you can be a life saver.

 

Best regards.

[Guest Gollywobbler]

Hi Alan

 

Going it alone is fine - until something goes awry with the processing of your application. Sadly, we are seeing more visa applications in recent months (particularly skilled applications) that have to be followed up because they appear to be falling down the cracks ...

 

 

 

 

Whuich "cracks", please? Such a vague statement is nothing more than scaremongering unless it is properly explained, isn't it?

 

Best wishes

 

Gill

[Guest Lou.ise]

hello cheryl,loads of people on here have done it themselves,all the help and advice you need you will get on here,gill(gollywobbler)seems dead well up on everything and is quick to help,we were cutting it fine because i was coming up to 45 so we used an agent,concept australia in manchester,all my mates used them and got their visas,it cost £1300 for the 2 of us about 15 months ago,4k seems expensive to me,also there is online agents who are cheaper again,anyway good luck

 

 

Hi we are using the same agent for more or less the same reasons!! So the up- to- date quote that we have been given is £1750. We have 3 children but our eldest is 22 they are still helping us with him as he needs to get in via a different visa route :arghh:

I do feel more comfortable using an agent. My friends used/recommended concept australia and everything was very straight forward for them.

Lou.

[jimmy1977]

Hi, thanks 4 that , I might try them, thanks again, Cheryl

[jimmy1977]

thanks, u sound like a gem, may need to talk with you some more in the future, I think we may get xmas out of the way now why we not in such a hurry , but in the meantime finding this website is interesting & very useful, thanks again, cheryl

[jimmy1977]

thanks so much, we gonna get xmas out the way first , then I think I'll give it a go , nothing to lose - everything to gain! Thanks again

[Alan Collett]

Hi Alan

 

 

 

Whuich "cracks", please? Such a vague statement is nothing more than scaremongering unless it is properly explained, isn't it?

 

Best wishes

 

Gill

 

The Skilled Processing Centre handles thousands of applications, Gill.

 

The reality is that an increasing number of these applications seem to disappear - applicants lodge documentation and nothing happens to progress the application.

 

What does the unrepresented applicant do then? Who do you complain to? Agreed there is a webpage where you can follow up a skilled visa application, but what do you do when you don't get a reply from that either?

 

We have a process internally that flags all applications that we consider to be complete. We then escalate these applications by communicating at an appropriate level. The result is generally visa grant within 7 days.

 

I hope this puts flesh on the bones of my comment above. Applicants who "go it alone" should be mindful that they are one amongst a significant volume of applications - having proactive representation can achieve a more timely outcome.

 

Best regards.

[Guest Gollywobbler]

Hi Alan

 

Thanks for the clarification. I hear you.

 

It is also true, though, that unrepresented applicants have needed to contact senior people at the ASPC and it is not difficult to organise doing so. Names, e-mails and direct dial numbers for everybody from the State Directors down to the Region Managers at the ASPC and in other centres are all in the public domain. They are merely not broadcast on the boards on forums like this one.

 

DIAC do not make a deep dark secret out of a piece of information that somebody needs to know in connection with his/her visa application, imparting that information only to the Favoured Few or something. Quite the reverse. They are public servants, they know it and they are as accessible as any other Civil Service Department.

 

It might suit some Agents to make a great hocus pocus out of this but that would be misleading, wouldn't it?

 

Also, although I am the first to agree that yours is one of the most efficient and well-run practices around, unfortunately the service provided by many, many other RMAs is nothing short of abysmal. The client has no way of sorting the sheep from the goats before risking a significant sum of money on a "service" that might well turn out to be anything but any sort of proper level of service despite the firm concerned having one or more RMAs at the helm.

 

Until the MIA/MARA or whoever do something effective about quality control within the industry, members of the public will continue to be appallingly badly let down by the migration advice industry, all too regularly. Not by you or your own firm but by far, far too many others. That makes a lot of people legitimately sceptical of the entire industry. Cleaning it up can only happen from within but I have seen no evidence of any desire to do just that - clean it up.

 

The MARA has no teeth. It does not even have the power to order the Agent to refund the client whom s/he has let down. If an Agent refuses to make reparation and also refuses to claim on his/her PI policy, realistically there is nothing that the client can do and nobody to help him. There is no central MARA compensation fund to re-imburse the client if the RMA drops dead or goes bust, either.

 

The MARA has not even stamped out the frankly dishonest practice which goes thus:

Client is in the UK. The RMA knows that. He has premises in the UK but he is in New Zealand. The salesmanship of the practice is so slick that the client signs the service agreement and pays up 100% of the money without noticing that the contract is governed by a piece of domestic consumer legislation that is effective only in New Zealand. Why is it not an absolute RULE that the law governing the contract must be that of the England & Wales or Scotland in this scenario?

 

This is not about whether somebody should instruct RMA Alan Collett instead of RMA Joe Bloggs. My question is whether the client would really gain anything by involving an RMA at all, given the level of risk to his money and his affairs which is inherently involved if he does do?

 

Best wishes

 

Gill

[Alan Collett]

If I may I'll not be sidetracked to any significant extent into the question of the effectiveness of the regulator, Gill. I have my views, and they are not far removed from yours.

 

I would take issue with your observation as to the identities of suitable people within the Department though. So far as I know contact details are not readily accessible to the general public. Indeed, there are communication mediums that only Registered Migration Agents can use.

 

Who would you contact if you were a skilled visa applicant, had a problem because you had heard nothing, and wanted to follow up with the ASPC?

 

I know who we contact (I have done so for 3 skilled applications already this morning - with a communication channel that is only available to RMAs) - and as I say this follow up generally leads to visa grant within a matter of days.

 

Indeed, I would not be asserting that unrepresented clients are looking at the same ease of access to DIAC officers - this is manifestly not the case.

 

At the end of the day, the consumer has to take some responsibility for the process of "interviewing" an agent and making an informed choice about whether they want to pay a fee for expertise and the comfort of engaging someone who will go into bat for them. And I can't speak for what other firms will do - not least because I don't know what internal systems they implement (if any) for the monitoring of client applications. Maybe that is a question to be asked by enquirers of their list of prospective advisors?

 

Best regards.

[Guest Gollywobbler]

Hi Alan

 

I am pleased to hear that you and I agree that the migration advice industry needs dragging up by its bootstraps. My question was whether RMAs themselves are doing anything about ensuring that it happens?

 

Evidently there are far, far more channels of access to senior ASPC staff than you are aware of? The fact that you are aware of one route - which I shall dub "The RMAs' hotline' - does not mean that there are not also several others - which work equally well, my friend.

 

Best wishes

 

Gill

[Alan Collett]

Then it seems we shall have to agree to differ on one thing, Gill - the ability of the unrepresented applicant to make an effective enquiry of DIAC that achieves the desired outcome.

 

Best regards.

[Guest Gollywobbler]

Hi Alan

 

I agree. We shall differ. I have seen unrepresented applicants succeed perfectly well several times. They would have no reason to tell you how they did it. I share information that I have with them, if they ask, at no cost. They then tell me things that they have discovered as a result of their own enquiries. The collective database grows and it has been proven to work without fail every time it has been used so far.

 

DIAC do not set out to conceal any information whatsoever that a visa applicant might need. If you ask, they tell you. They can't do anything else when their forms make it abundantly clear that there is no compulsion to use an agent of any sort and that an agent cannot make anything happen that an applicant in person cannot also achieve. If no agent is involved, DIAC provide any necessary assistance themselves, free of charge.

 

If DIAC ever tried to tell the public, "You may not apply for a visa for Oz unless you use a Registered Migration Agent," or they tried to say, "Your chances of success with us will be greater if you use an RMA than if you do not," the reaction of the public would be 100% negative. They would tell Australia where to shove its arrogance and they would migrate to some other jurisdiction instead.

 

Also, DIAC are not stupid enough to risk the legal come-back on themselves if they were to insist that Joe Bloggs must use an RMA and that RMA then lets him down. DIAC is a non profit-making Government department. It is simply not in a position to try to demand that its clients should enrich a profit-making third party for the sake of obtaining a visa for Oz.

 

Look at the amount of help that DIAC - specifically the ASPC but not only the ASPC - have given to the Visa Connection clients. The MARA and the MIA have not done a solitary thing to help a single one of them but the ASPC and the other DIAC units have guided and supported all the people who were not prepared to waste any more money on Registered Migration Agents after the way Ashley McEwen - a Registered Migration Agent whose practice has not been closed down in spite of his part in the Visa Connection fiasco - and those supposedly tasked with regulating his activities have performed and have conspicuously failed to perform.

 

I get the feeling that you are trying to describe a special cosiness with DIAC that you would like to believe in, but I can assure you that Joe Applicant can get just as much assistance from DIAC as you can if he uses his loaf, and he can get that help free of charge from DIAC, unlike from your firm.

 

Best wishes

 

Gill

[Alan Collett]

I hear what you say, Gill.

 

I will though maintain that visa applicants achieve the desired outcome with less stress, and generally a better presented application (enhancing the prospects of success) by engaging a competent advisor. Note my emphasis. :spinny:

 

I say this because I believe it to be so, not because of a commercial interest.

 

The same applies across most areas of professional advice.

 

Added to which, what value does one put on one's own time researching, preparing, double checking, etc, etc?

 

There is no doubt that forums such as this have empowered consumers, but the old adage a little knowledge is a dangerous thing is worth remembering.

 

Best regards.

[Guest HappyBunny]

We have a process internally that flags all applications that we consider to be complete. We then escalate these applications by communicating at an appropriate level. The result is generally visa grant within 7 days.

 

I am concerned by your comment Alan, in particular by using the terms 'escalate' and 'appropriate level' you are implying that you are in some way able to 'speed up' applications by dealing with people that Joe Public don't have access to and expedite the granting of the visa.

 

To this end your comment is misleading as the DIAC website clearly states:

 

You are able to lodge any kind of visa application or asylum claim yourself. Your application will not be decided any sooner if you use a migration agent and they cannot influence the outcome of your application.

 

All you can do is chase applications that you consider are taking too long (which you should, as after all that is what you are being paid to do), equally as Gill said, Joe Public can pick up the phone and do the same.

[Alan Collett]

I am concerned by your comment Alan, in particular by using the terms 'escalate' and 'appropriate level' you are implying that you are in some way able to 'speed up' applications by dealing with people that Joe Public don't have access to and expedite the granting of the visa.

 

To this end your comment is misleading as the DIAC website clearly states:

 

You are able to lodge any kind of visa application or asylum claim yourself. Your application will not be decided any sooner if you use a migration agent and they cannot influence the outcome of your application.

 

All you can do is chase applications that you consider are taking too long (which you should, as after all that is what you are being paid to do), equally as Gill said, Joe Public can pick up the phone and do the same.

 

Hello HB.

 

There has in fact been a debate in recent days on the MIA Forum (a forum for registered migration agents) about DIAC's comments regarding the use of a migration agent.

 

I believe that an agent does influence the outcome of a visa application if s/he is instructed. If one looks at the definition of "influence" you will see that simply by guiding an applicant as to the documentation to be provided, the contents of references, etc an agent must influence the outcome of the application.

 

What I think the Department means is that an agent cannot have an undue effect on the visa application decision making process that would cause an application to be granted positively when the facts of the case indicate the application should be refused.

 

Or, that case officers cannot be coerced to make a decision to grant a visa that would not be granted were an agent not acting.

 

In summary, it is a poor choice of words by the Department.

 

Re your comment: "I am concerned by your comment Alan, in particular by using the terms 'escalate' and 'appropriate level' you are implying that you are in some way able to 'speed up' applications by dealing with people that Joe Public don't have access to and expedite the granting of the visa."

 

Yes, that is what I am saying, and I make that comment based on the increasing number of applicants who are contacting my firm asking us to assist with the finalisation of their visa application.

 

I appreciate that Gill may have a database, and that you may obtain details of certain persons from her. However, registered agents who are on the ball will have names, email addresses, and telephone numbers that Joe P generally won't - added to which there are channels of communication that only registered agents can access.

 

Best regards.

[Guest Gollywobbler]

Hi Happy Bunny

 

Seconded. DIAC are not bothered about who makes the visa application. The only people with any real clout in the game are the Directors of DIAC, the Minister and Australian MPs. Which is the same with all Government departments.

 

I totally agree with Alan that some people do not want the bother of DIY. That is a perfectly fair comment. Others are jittery and don't want to tear their own nerves to shreds, which is equally reasonable.

 

Touting for business is totally banned in the legal profession in E&W. Another rule that the MARA could usefully make and impose on its members in my view.

 

Instructing an Agent simply because one does not want the bother or one feels jittery when confronted by a load of forms are both perfectly valid reasons for using an Agent.

 

However this discussion began with dark hints about "cracks." These turned out to be applications or supporting documents which mysteriously vanish after delivery to the ASPC. Which does happen very occasionally, but DIAC certainly wouldn't agree with the contention that it is any less likely to happen if lodged/sent by an Agent. Nor would they agree with any suggestion that their document processing is such rubbish that whether or not a complete application eventually makes its way on to a decision-maker's desk is in the lap of the gods. Their system is not 100% foolproof because no system can be. But it is certainly rare for DIAC to lose applications and documents. Statistically it will happen more often with DIY applications simply because only 20% of applications are submitted by Agents in the first place.

 

Then it turned into a Hotline Number for God. A deep secret between DIAC and a Chosen Few, seemingly. Which all begins to sound just teeny bit OTT to me. Someone will be along in a minute to allege rolled up trouser legs and funny handshakes, no doubt.....

 

DIAC offer not a clue by way of guidance about whether an advisor might be competent or not. MARA-registration is no guarantee of that whatsoever. Alan suggests that a prospective client should ask a shedload of detailed questions. Yet these questions are not suggested anywhere on either the MIA or the MARA websites. Why not?

 

Best wishes

 

Gill

[Alan Collett]

PS. Re the comment: "All you can do is chase applications that you consider are taking too long (which you should, as after all that is what you are being paid to do) ...": I agree.

 

However, I think you would find a variation in the preparedness of advisors to take up the cudgels on behalf of applicants.

 

I imagine intending applicants might make enquiries in that regard when deciding which agent might be appointed.

[Guest Gollywobbler]

Hi Alan

 

I would suggest that it is time to give this one a rest, frankly.

 

If RMAs are not happy with DIAC's statements about the use of agents or otherwise, why doesn't your "governing body" approach DIAC with a re-draft which would satisfy you and your colleagues?

 

Yes, that is what I am saying, and I make that comment based on the increasing number of applicants who are contacting my firm asking us to assist with the finalisation of their visa application.

 

 

 

To my certain knowledge, a fair few of these applicants have come to you after having been shockingly badly let down by one or more of your direct competitors. Are you saying that others have come to you in increasing numbers because DIAC have been letting them down?

 

If you are not implying either of the above, am I to take it that the hard sell via scaremongering is having some success for your practice?

 

And why is touting not completely forbidden in the migration advice industry in the same way as the Law Society of E&W have long forbidden the practice of touting?

 

Best wishes

 

Gill

[Alan Collett]

Hi Happy Bunny

 

Seconded. DIAC are not bothered about who makes the visa application. The only people with any real clout in the game are the Directors of DIAC, the Minister and Australian MPs. Which is the same with all Government departments.

 

I totally agree with Alan that some people do not want the bother of DIY. That is a perfectly fair comment. Others are jittery and don't want to tear their own nerves to shreds, which is equally reasonable.

 

Touting for business is totally banned in the legal profession in E&W. Another rule that the MARA could usefully make and impose on its members in my view.

 

Instructing an Agent simply because one does not want the bother or one feels jittery when confronted by a load of forms are both perfectly valid reasons for using an Agent.

 

However this discussion began with dark hints about "cracks." These turned out to be applications or supporting documents which mysteriously vanish after delivery to the ASPC. Which does happen very occasionally, but DIAC certainly wouldn't agree with the contention that it is any less likely to happen if lodged/sent by an Agent. Nor would they agree with any suggestion that their document processing is such rubbish that whether or not a complete application eventually makes its way on to a decision-maker's desk is in the lap of the gods. Their system is not 100% foolproof because no system can be. But it is certainly rare for DIAC to lose applications and documents. Statistically it will happen more often with DIY applications simply because only 20% of applications are submitted by Agents in the first place.

 

Then it turned into a Hotline Number for God. A deep secret between DIAC and a Chosen Few, seemingly. Which all begins to sound just teeny bit OTT to me. Someone will be along in a minute to allege rolled up trouser legs and funny handshakes, no doubt.....

 

DIAC offer not a clue by way of guidance about whether an advisor might be competent or not. MARA-registration is no guarantee of that whatsoever. Alan suggests that a prospective client should ask a shedload of detailed questions. Yet these questions are not suggested anywhere on either the MIA or the MARA websites. Why not?

 

Best wishes

 

Gill

 

Gill,

 

Leaving aside the emotional nonsense above can I say that I am not - emphasis NOT - claiming a special relationship with DIAC.

 

I will though reserve the right to point out the realities of visa processing, and the issues I consider applicants should be factoring into a decision as to whether or not an agent is worthwhile.

 

As you know we handle hundreds of visa applications each year. I think that gives me a perspective on which I can make observations and draw conclusions.

 

And as I said above, I am endeavouring to do so objectively.

 

Giving the impression that the generality of unrepresented visa applicants are operating from the same position of knowledge as one who is represented by a competent advisor is (in my view) potentially doing a disservice to those who lodge unrepresented.

 

Best regards.