Guest alison 2007 Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 Posted by Gollywobbler on behalf of Alison 2007 hi new to the site,noticed names on a few things i was interested in.Hope you can help. We are going through the australian visa bureau,don't know if we should try and do things ourselves as they are quite expensive, but then again don't know much about a lot of things.Bothered because husband is on disability benefits, don't want to pay out thousands to be told at medical we can't go.We have points needed,i am a hairdresser . Website is fab hope you or anyone can help! thanx ali Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ian&Lou Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 Hi Ali, We are using Visa Bureau and they have been great so far. Using an agent is expensive compared to doing it yourself, we decided to use one as we are not that great at all this form filling lark and didn't want to get it wrong, however a lot of people on this site have done it themselves. Whichever route you choose I'm sure everyone on here will help you as much as they can. Have you spoken to any agents yet, as most of them do offer a free consultation before you sign up with them, so they will probably be able to give you a good idea of your chances of success. There are also a few agents that post replies on this site, i'm sure one of them would be willing to help answer your question about disability. Good luck Lou Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gollywobbler Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 Hi Ali Honey, why is Hubby on disability benefit? Also, do you mean Incapacity Benefit or Disability Living Allowance? The reason why I ask is because you need to read this form very carefully: http://www.immi.gov.au/allforms/pdf/1071i.pdf How old are you & Hubby respectively and how disabled is he? Unfortunately, your situation comes into a very highly-specialised, difficult part of the legislation. There are a handful of solicitors and migration agents who really know what they are doing when the medical situation is complicated, and the names of the relevant solicitors and agents are very well-known. I have heard excellent reports about Visa Bureau, but I have never heard them mentioned in connection with an application where the meds would be tricky. They may be excellent at cases with medical problems but if I were in your shoes, I would use an Agent with a proven and really solid track-record with these complex cases. All-too often I have seen situations where an Agent who really knows nothing about the medical criteria for migration has been involved and a very expensive fiasco has been the result. I think that if you can tell us more about Hubby's problems, and his age, it will be easier for me to try to help you with this. I am not a Migration Agent myself, but I do know the names of some of the experts in this field and I can let you have them if you want them. There are really two questions here. The first is whether there is any realistic chance of Hubby passing the meds. If there is a reasonable chance that he would be OK on the Meds then the next question is which of the possible visas would be the best one for you to apply for, because the appeal-rights are not the same with all the visas. If you can give some more information, I think it would help so that we can try to start helping you to work this out. Best wishes Gill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alison 2007 Posted March 15, 2007 Share Posted March 15, 2007 HI gill, i am 41yrs old,my husband is 51 yrs old.My husband hasn't worked for a number of years due to him being on tablets, he had a kind of breakdown,due to different things that had gone on in the past,he had worked from leaving school as a retail manager.He gets disability allowance.We do have the points needed but our next step is to start paying money to the bureau which is a bit scarey,because we may not get through the medical.He's not a dithering wreck,but he needs the tablets to keep him stable minded,and he is quite spritley for a bloke in his 50's.I hope this makes sense. We are hoping to go to melbourne or brisbane.We have 2 kids 11 & 8. The website is fab thanx for your help it is much appreciated Ali Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ali Posted March 15, 2007 Share Posted March 15, 2007 It may be worth considering that your hubby would probably not be entitled to any benefits in Oz for a couple of years (I don't know your financial position), but it may make a difference to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gollywobbler Posted March 15, 2007 Share Posted March 15, 2007 Hi Ali 2007 Thanks for the additional info and I'm sorry about the delay in gettingg back to you. Honey, please, please slow right down, here. There is doubt about whether or not Hubby will be able to meet the medical criteria for migration. Australia will not normally accept someone who has a medical condition which makes them eligible for long-term Disability Benefits in another country. If Hubby is eligible for and in receipt of Disability Living Allowance in the UK, then prima facie he would be entitled to claim Australia's Disability Support Pension instead. This is not a game of chance, whatever you might have been led to believe up to now. In considering Hubby's meds, the Medical Officer of the Commonwealth would consult the Tables of Impairment in the Australian Social Security Act 1991. From those, it is possible to calculate the level of Disability Support pension which an Australian clone of Hubby would be able to claim. Then it is possible to multpiy that figure by the number of years that an Australian clone aged 51 now would be able to claim DSP for. The clone would be entitled to other ancillary benefits as well, and the sum total of those can also be worked out. So one starts with the sum total of what the Australian clone would be able to get by way of Benefits. A very highly skilled lawyer might be able to argue DIAC down from their first estimate of the likely costs to the Government, based on the idea that Disability Support Pension is not payable until someone has lived in Oz for ten years. (The only exception is where the person becomes disabled after moving to Australia, which would not be the case here.) If it were me, I think I would instruct my lawyers to try to get the principles, at least, of how to tackle this case agreed with DIAC before submitting anyting to them formally. But if it were me, I would also be using a top notch firm of Australian solicitors for this particular job. I would NOT use an ordinary firm of Migration Agents for this case because they are not competent or qualified to deal with the Australian Social Security Act on the whole, and that Act is the one which would need to be considered in this case, not just the migration legislation alone. Even if DIAC refused to co-operate with the idea I have suggested, it is possble to do exactly the same sums as DIAC would do, independently of DIAC. Once the figures are known, it is then possible to reach an accurate conclusion about the likelihood or otherwise of Huby being able to meet the medical criteria for migration. Have the Visa Bureau explained all this to you? What exactly do they want the first chunk of money for? Have they discussed with you whether or not Hubby's Disability Living Allowance would be continued if he ceases to reside in the UK? That is another point you would need to consider, honey. Could you afford to support your family on your salary alone for ten years? Best wishes Gill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calNgary Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 We too knew we would have problems with the medical and Visa Bureau gave us the option of doing this first before investing loads of money,albeit if succesful we may have had to repeat it to be in the correct timeframe but at least you know,i would speak to them about this as they seemed very clued up when dealing with our individual case ,good luck Cal x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gollywobbler Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 Hi all Following on from Cal's post about frontloading the meds, it does appear that it might be possible to have a complete "dummy run" when there is doubt about the meds, by the following ingenious means: Instead of paying to go through the TRA process and then forking out more for the visa-application fees, it appears that what one can do instead is to pay $70.00 and make a manual (paper & post) application for a 12 month tourist visa, using Form 48. Please see here: http://www.immi.gov.au/visitors/tourist/676/index.htm Only the person whose medical condition needs to be tested against the medical criteria for permanent migration needs to apply for the long-stay tourist visa. For someone under 70, it would not normally be necessary to submit any medical information at all with an application for this visa, but it seems that it is possible to submit a full set of meds with the application, with a request that they be considered to the same extent as if an application for permanent migration had been made. Plainly, one doesn't simply fill out the forms and send them in "cold." One would need to talk with DIAC in London in some detail to explain that the idea is to make a "dummy run" at the meds on behalf of the person one is concerned about etc etc. Get them to agree to the plan in advance, in other words. I can see why DIAC might have a policy which permits this strategy. Firstly, nobody likes failing a volunteer especially if they have made a huge amount of effort and spent a lot of money, plus waited for months and months one way or another, only to discover at the very end of the process that their dream is unattainable because of medical problems with one member of the family. Permitting a dummy run can avoid a huge amount of strain and heartbreak for the would-be applicant family, by getting a medical "yes" or "no" quickly and at minimal cost. The idea is sensible from DIAC's point of view too. At best they break even on the equation between the revenue they receive in visa application charges and what it costs them to keep the processing centres and other offices open, plus pay the staff to man them. It is not in their own interests to do a vast amount of work processing an application for Permanent Migration if the meds of one member of the family could render DIAC's own efforts futile in the end. I came across this idea on the website of a firm of solicitors in Australia, suggesting that this is a possible strategy when there is doubt about the meds for one member of the family or, indeed, for the main applicant. Never having seen this suggestion made anywhere else, I asked Alan Collett about it a couple of months ago. He said that a couple of years ago, he attended a Seminar or Conference at which a senior member of DIAC's Health Section was present. She told Alan and the other Agents that this idea of testing the water via an application for a tourist visa is possible. Apparently Alan's colleagues in Southampton used to work for DIAC in London, so Alan asked them to ask their contacts in London about the suggestion. They didn't really seem to be aware of what the Health Section Boss out in Australia had said. However, DIAC in London are very accommodating and helpful. If someone were to tell them about the Seminar etc and what was said, and ask them to check it out direct with the Boss of the Health Section of DIAC, I'm sure they would make enquiries and if they were told, "Yep. We'll help with a dummy run on the meds," I'm sure that DIAC in London would bend over backwards to help. As I say, one wouldn't just whack in a very strange-looking application completely out of the blue. Reality is that there would be careful discussion with them beforehand so that they are aware that it is a "dummy run" and why that is considered to be in the best interests of both sides. I don't think one would argue the toss at the dummy run stage if they said they were going to refuse the application on medical grounds. Instead one would let them refuse the application and then use the Freedom of Information Act to demand a copy of the medical file, in order to see exactly what the MOC's reasoning has been. Armed with that information, the prospective visa applicant's lawyers would be able to take matters onwards from there, and to prepare for a fight if need be in advance, instead of being caught on the back foot by an unexpected refusal. Or the file would reveal that it would be futile to try to proceed with an application for permanent migration. If bad news, at least it has been obtained for a fraction of the cost and strain that doing a full-scale application for permanent migration would have involved. Gotta run. No time to check this, edit it and finesse it since I'm running late. I hope it isn't too garbled. Best wishes Gill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alison 2007 Posted March 17, 2007 Share Posted March 17, 2007 hi gill, thanx for the imfo.The visa bureau did'nt explain anything to me. I did keep querying him about our situation, he said it all looks fine on paper.The initial payment of £1,057 is to send our file to the australian gov to see if we look ok on paper. Then we pay another payment.Then it would be the meds.We realise we would'nt get any benefits like here.Just not sure if my wage would cover us in oz.We would'nt have a mortgage ,i dont think the wages are as good as here.Feeling like not sure what to do! Maybe our own doctor could help us out. sorry feel like the prophet of doom and gloom. Its hard to know what to do we cant just give money like that away. I'm not a misery really ali Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alison 2007 Posted March 17, 2007 Share Posted March 17, 2007 hi cal thanx for that. I did query the visa bureau about my husband, he just said everything looks fine on paper. He didn't mention a dummy run, do you think they should have? Its a lot of money. Did you get through the meds no trouble? hope you donn't mind me asking any info you can give would be appreciated ali Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calNgary Posted March 18, 2007 Share Posted March 18, 2007 Hiya i have a form of liver failure and visa bureau were very honest and said even thou everything is based on hubby skills wise they didnt know how my condition would affect the end result ,we were told we could just go for it and if failed on anything other than my medical we could get money back,or we could do the meds first and see what response we recieve,we decided to bite the bullet and go for it ,,it was stressful to say the least,,anyone remembering the ''find me a bridge post"" will know what i mean,,i was sent by dimia to see a panel specialist of their choice and to get a report written by him ,the only 'advantage' i had going for me was my condition is not currently making me ill ,just take 3 tabs a day but it may cause my liver to fail in 20 yrs or so,Dimia decided i could earn my keep before id need their resources so here i am,,its s tough decision but well worth it ,,good luck and if i can help anymore please ask Cal x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gollywobbler Posted March 18, 2007 Share Posted March 18, 2007 Hi Ali 2007 I have had another e-chat with Alan Collett in the last 24 hours, to see whether he could tell us any more about the idea of testing the meds via a tourist visa. He says that the feedback which Go Matilda received from DIAC in London was that they would not normally consider the meds for a tourist application in the same depth and detail that they would go into for a visa for permanent migration to Oz. I would expect that reaction because they were not being asked in any specific context. Also, I shouldn't think it is a practice they would want to encourage too much because DIAC has to pay the two groups of doctors who between them provide the Medical Officer of the Commonwealth service. (Health Services Australia, who have a website, and the Health Assessment Service. If the latter has a website, I haven't found it.) I don't know what the financial deal is between DIAC and the medics, but I would guess that there might be a sliding scale according to how complex the meds situation turns out to be. $70 might not cover it, which is all that a long-winded application for a tourist visa would cost. Nevertheless... If the Health Section in Australia said this is possible, which they did, then either it is possible or the Officer from the Health Section was misleading the Migration Institute of Australia for reasons unknown. It is such an obscure idea that I was quite surprised to learn that Alan Collett had even heard of it. I would not have been surprised if he had told me, "Fiddlesticks, Gill! Whoever is saying that on their website is flying a kite because the legislation does not contain the machinery to do this." He did not say that. Alan keeps his ear to the ground with this stuff and he was present when the suggestion was made. I can't think of many situations where one would want to do this, though. When I was researching these visas on behalf of my 85 year old Mum (who is now 86) we were very worried about the meds because Mum is physically disabled. I felt that unless I stuck to the DIAC website like glue and eschewed all others, I would get myself into the most appalling muddle with the whole thing. We did frontload Mum's meds, as Cal has suggested, but I didn't discover the possibility of testing them via a tourist visa until after Mum's application was in and we knew she had been cleared on the meds. If I had known about the possibility sooner, would I have explored it for Mum? On balance, no. I wouldn't have wasted time with Mum because of her great age. A dummy run with her would merely have delayed matters and would have eventually involved two sets of meds and two geriatrician's reports. If I were in your shoes, however, the person I would (myself) contact is a solicitor in Australia called Diana Tong, or her colleague Nigel Dobbie. Diana Tong is a Partner in Parish Patience, which is an extremely tough, tenacious firm of Immigration Litigation specialists in Sydney. Nigel Dobbie is an accredited specialist in Immi Law and I had him hovering in the background with my mother's application, even though my sister and I fronted the application ourselves. Nonetheless, Parish Patience were on standby, ready to take over from us at short notice if the application started to wobble on the medical front. In the end, they did not have to do anything but I liked Nigel Dobbie immensely in the e-mails I exchanged with him and I trusted him totally. That, coming from me, is extremely high praise, I can tell you! I had made it clear that I did not want to go to Peter Bollard (the usual guru with the medical stuff) because if everyone who gets told to go to him were to do so, he would need 25 clones of himself to handle the workload. Nothing personal about Peter Bollard, who accepted my groan and suggested Nigel Dobbie instead. I was already aware of Parish Patience and liked the cut of their jib. I contacted Nigel Dobbie and was immensely impressed. For you, I'd be inclined to suggest Diana Tong, though, because she is an expert on the Tables of Impairment in the Social Security Act 1991 and the workings of the SSA generally. She was involved in an MRT case, acting for a man who was blind. DIAC had done the figures for the Blind Pension for this man based on the whole of his expected life-span. Diana Tong got the Tribunal to accept that the Blind Pension would cease to be payable once the guy turned 65, so she clearly knows her onions with this stuff. She didn't win the case, that time, but I think she might well have won it following the Robinson case in 2005. Robinson turned the whole way that the medical criteria are considered upside down. It established once and for all that where there is doubt about the medical future, the benefit of the doubt must be given to the applicant, not to the Minister, which had been the case up until then. A LOT of the earlier cases would be decided differently if they were to be re-heard following Robinson, because Robinson has set a precedent which must be followed. In your Hubby's case, Robinson is irrelevant, I reckon. There is no doubt that he cannot work. He is 51 now. From the Centrelink website, it seems very unlikely that he would be able to get Disability Support Pension in Oz unless he has been a PR there for 10 years. Realistically, by the time you had gone through the visa process and actually moved to Australia, Hubby would be nearer 55. 10 years to go before he could qualify for the Age Pension in Oz, apparently. I don't know whether his theoretical entitlement to Disability Support Pension would cease once he turns 65. The Evans case suggests that it would, but I do not know for sure. If it were me and I were really serious about the idea of moving to Oz, I would ask Diana Tong about your situation. If it is the case that the Disability Support Pension would not be available to Hubby because of the 10-year lead-in with it, then I can't see what he could cost the Australian Govt much above and beyond the Age Pension in due course. If they want your hairdressing skills now, they accept the Age Pension for both of you in due course, it seems to me. Otherwise, Aussies go without haircuts. There HAS to be a trade-off. DIAC being DIAC (reactionary and intransigent, without which the Appeals process wouldn't be necessary) I wouldn't put it past them to try it on with a visa-refusal of Hubby on medical grounds. My gut-instinct is that they could be defeated because of Hubby's age and the 10-year rule with DSP. However, this is a game to play from the front foot if possible, not from the back foot following a visa-refusal. Personally I loathe Litigation. Litigators always tell me, "The place for the arguments is in the Pleadings, not in the correspondence." I disagree. I believe that the real solution is to thrash the answers out in advance of taking any formal steps at all and to avoid having to invite His Honour to the party. As far as I am concerned, the Court represents Cost, Hassle and Nit-Picking Procedure, all of it fought from the back foot. As I haven't a clue about the said Procedure, my own instinct is to stay away from the Court. I prefer the flexibility that comes from being able to say, "I might not offer to buy your basket of goods. Currently, I'm not happy with some of the terms of your Invitation to Treat. I will work with you and we can see whether we can improve your Invitation to Treat. If we can, then you will get your Offer from me, I’ll get your Acceptance and we’ll all be happy.” I can see no reason at all not to say this to the Australian Government as well as to the guy trying to sell me bruised fruit on a market stall. A visa is just as much of a horse-trade in my view. I told them exactly that with regard to a legal (not a medico-legal) question on behalf of my Mum. I told them firmly that I was not prepared to spend my “client’s” (Mum’s) money on a wing & a prayer when there was doubt about what the legislation actually means in the context of our particular headache with it. They couldn’t have been more helpful about it. As a tactic, reverse-selling works. I believe that it is way, way too soon for you to start considering launching the visa-application process. It is definitely possible for a skilled lawyer to work out how best to tackle this in the light of Hubby’s medical situation. The lawyers wouldn’t do that without a fee. An Agency wants your money in return for having a bash without really doing anything at all in advance, it would seem – all rather vague, in my view. If you read the fine print of the “money back guarantee” promise, it usually excludes liability in the event of medical refusal. As an Irishman would tell you, “If I wanted to go from Cork to Dublin, I wouldn’t start from this cross-road!” Best wishes Gill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.