Guest vikkibee Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 Hi everyone, i am a new member and would like to know if anyone can help me, we are looking at applying for visa, husbands is a brick layer, and we have a beautiful daughter who has down's syndrome she is 8 years old. does anybody know the situation regarding being successful in obtaining a visa, preferably permanent but any type of visa, when we have a child with mild downs syndrome. in advance thank you so much for your help. bev, donald, jess & harry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Andy Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 Hi everyone, i am a new member and would like to know if anyone can help me, we are looking at applying for visa, husbands is a brick layer, and we have a beautiful daughter who has down's syndrome she is 8 years old. does anybody know the situation regarding being successful in obtaining a visa, preferably permanent but any type of visa, when we have a child with mild downs syndrome. in advance thank you so much for your help. bev, donald, jess & harry Hi, welcome to the forum, i cant help with your daughter but i am sure there are plenty of people on here who can give you loads of helpful advice with regards to that. I am a bricklayer though and there are loads of us tradies on here so i may be able to help your husband on that score especially if he is going down the vettasess route. Good luck to you on your journey:yes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest vikkibee Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 Hi, welcome to the forum, i cant help with your daughter but i am sure there are plenty of people on here who can give you loads of helpful advice with regards to that.I am a bricklayer though and there are loads of us tradies on here so i may be able to help your husband on that score especially if he is going down the vettasess route. Good luck to you on your journey:yes: thank you so much just waiting to see how things go about jess first re down's & being able to apply for visa for her, then we'll be in touch for help. thank you bev, donald, jess & harry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quoll Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 I'd suggest you get advice from an agent who specializes in medical conditions. It wont be an easy process, no matter how mild the disability. George Lombard and Peter Bollard are names that are often recommended (no personal knowledge or affiliation). If you dont go to an agent with specific knowledge in this area then you run the risk of being promised the moon and forking out a lot of money for no result. Be wary too that you have a better chance of getting a temporary visa which may seem that it puts you on the path to permanency but you will encounter the same medical decision if and when you do decide to go for permanency and you may have trekked all the way to Australia only to be refused permanency (if you wouldnt have got through the medical in the first place). You will need all the reports and assessments you can muster, if your daughter is essentially independent in school then get reports that say she is independent and unlikely to continue to need additional support. Good luck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonnieRocket0 Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 Hi everyone, i am a new member and would like to know if anyone can help me, we are looking at applying for visa, husbands is a brick layer, and we have a beautiful daughter who has down's syndrome she is 8 years old. does anybody know the situation regarding being successful in obtaining a visa, preferably permanent but any type of visa, when we have a child with mild downs syndrome. in advance thank you so much for your help. bev, donald, jess & harry Dear Vikkibee, Not to sure if this is of help, but we were recently awarded 176 visas. My son is autistic, so I am not so sure how DIAC/HOC view Downs Syndrome in comparision. Just to give you an insight, when we completed our paperwork, naturally we delcared his condition and submitted as much paperwork to our panel doctor as we possibly could. This was submitted in Sept 09 and two weeks after they referred my son's medical report for a further assessment by a clinical psychologist. This was a time consuming exercise to organise as my panel doctor had not had any experience of this, so we were left to fend for ourselves. I would imagine that you will complete all of the necessary initial aspect of the application and then you will get to the part where you will need to submit police checks and medicals. I can't stress enough how important that you supply as much medical documentation as possible to your panel doctor, stressing the positive aspects of level of abilities your daughter can demonstrate. In our case because the paediactricians report was just under 2 years old, HOC requested the further report regarding my son. Thankfully he seem to meet the HOC's requirements (Health Operations Centre) so DIAC then processed our application to issue the visa. If he was not to have passed, you then have the oppotunity to speak with the Case Officer to present further evidence to 'justify' your reasons for being issued a visa. Also depending on the type of visa, for instance mine was State Sponsored, then the State can then make representation on your behalf if they think you have a case. Quoll is quite right that perhaps in your case, you should speak with a good migration agent. Also perhaps another possible stab in the dark would be to try to either contact a panel doctor here in the UK or to contact the HOC in Sydney. I think that there was a case of a temporary migrant with a child with downs syndrome who was seeking permanent residency, and ended up taking high court action. Perhaps another forum member can point you in the right direction for further details. Anyway whatever you decide to do, good luck with your endeavours and should you decide to join the migrants club, then be prepared for a roller coaster ride of emotions that this process takes you along. Good luck Ronnie R Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Petals Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 Have a look at this link about a family in Perth WA nurse wins visa reprieve over Down syndrome child | Perth Now Also we had a doctor in a country town in Victoria ona temp visa and then was refused a permanent visa because his son had Downs, they overturned it and he stayed but then he left the country post, so guess he has not done a lot for others following with Downs children. Good luck, do all the research first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wrussell Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 Hi everyone, i am a new member and would like to know if anyone can help me, we are looking at applying for visa, husbands is a brick layer, and we have a beautiful daughter who has down's syndrome she is 8 years old. does anybody know the situation regarding being successful in obtaining a visa, preferably permanent but any type of visa, when we have a child with mild downs syndrome. in advance thank you so much for your help. bev, donald, jess & harry Have your child undertake a full medical examination for migration before you spend money on anything else. You would be well advised to seek professional advice about obtaining specialists' medical assessments of your child's condition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gollywobbler Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 Hi Vikkibee Welcome to Poms in Oz. My advice is that you should tread very carefully indeed. It wont be an easy process, no matter how mild the disability. George Lombard and Peter Bollard are names that are often recommended (no personal knowledge or affiliation). If you dont go to an agent with specific knowledge in this area then you run the risk of being promised the moon and forking out a lot of money for no result. Quoll is absolutely right and I've seen people be royally ripped off as a result of consulting Registered Migration Agents who claimed to know all about the health requirement for migration when the reality was that the RMA didn't have a clue about it. One chap was assured that his 16 year old son would be "fine" when the boy was profoundly disabled in every possible way according to the father. The dimmest, dumbest RMA should have known that the boy stood no chance and that it would be completely irresponsible to relieve his parents of any money. The RMAs who really understand the Health requirement for migration properly are all in Australia. They are not stupid about window dressing the application and hoping that that will be enough. It is particularly difficult when the child has Down Syndrome becus many of the most hgh profile cases have involved children with Downs. Tracey Robinson is a British midwife in Perth. Freehills are a huge, commercial firm of solicitors in Australia and they do not normally get involved with Immigration at all. However they do have a Pro Bono legal team, which is a trendy idea these days and somebody involved Freehills Pro Bono. A chap called Steven Penglis was the Freehills Partner in charge of the case. The fuss about Down Syndrome began with the child in the Blair case in the Court in 2001. The child was about 10 and apparently he was badly affected by Down Syndrome - at any rate the Medical Officer of the Commonwealth thought so and the family didn't really argue otherwise. The family lost the case in spite of a lerge trust fund in favour of the child. A year later in 2002, along came Master Robinson. He was in Australia, courtesy of his mother, on a tenporary 457 visa. There had been no problem with getting the child a temporary visa but it all became very nasty once the mother's employers (a hospital) tried to sponsor her for Permanent Residency. Master Robinson was about 10. The MOC said that he was permanently disabled and did not meet the Health requirement for permanent migration. The argument was that if he got PR, he would be eiigible for Australia's Disabilty Support Pension after 10 years and entitled to Special Benefit in the meanwhile. Mrs Robinson had to go to the Migration Review Tribunal and she chose to involve the Review MOC. The RMOC re-did the meds from scratch and accepted new evidence that the child was not badly disabled - apparently he will be able to lead a normal life when he grows up. The RMOC insisted that the child was badly disabled. Steven Penglis realised that the MOC and the RMOC were both wrong. They were saying that in the worst cases of Downs, the person is very badly affected. That is as maybe but it was not true for young Master Robinson, so Mr Penglis took the case to the court in 2005 and argued the toss. The Judge agreed that the proper construction of PIC 4005 is that the MOC must consider the actual condition - and the actual degree and severity - involved. The MOC must not base his findings on some higher level of the condition because that amounts to generalisation, which the legislation does not allow. Good for Mr Penglis. It was a ground breaking decision that made new law. DIAC accepted the legal reasoning and the Judge's ruling in Robinson remains the law up till today. I'm British and I live in the UK. I've got law degrees etc in English law but I don't really know anything about Australian law and I'm not a a migration agent. Until 2008 I assumed that if you win in court in Australia, presumably someone gives you a visa and that is the end of it? George Lombard is an Aussie lawyer and he told me that this is not how it works. Apparently a win in court establishes legal principles but it merely restores the applicant and the Minister for Immi back to Square One, as if a visa application has never been made. An appeal to the MRT has to be made and it has to fail before the applicant can invoke S351 of the Migration Act 1958. S351 allows the applicant to appeal directly to the Minister for Immigration. If the Minister, acting in his/her sole discretion, decides that the public interest is best served by granting the visas then the Minister can grant them - regardless of any other considerations - but nobody else can do it. For some reason there were two Ministerial Appeals in Mrs Robinson's case. I don't know why there were two but that seems to be quite usual in Oz as well. This lengthy process is also very expensive unless Freehills do it at no reward to themselves. Mrs Robinson had to pay the out-of-pocket Court and Tribunal fees for her several cases but she did not have to pay anything for Freehills' time. They are a very expensive firm - fees for their time would have crippled a midwife if their Pro Bono team had not dealt with the whole thing. By 2008, Mrs Robinson's file was gathering dust in the Minister's office somewhere. Until Dr Moeller came along in rural VIC in 2008. Petals has referred to Dr Moeller in her post. Dr Moeller was in charge of acute care or something similar in a hospital in Horsham in rural Victoria. Apparently he was vital to allowing this hospital to care for acutely ill patients locally or something similar. Just as with Mrs Robinson, there had been no fuss when Dr Moeller obtained a temporary 457 visa for himself and his family - which includes Lukas Moeller. He is very badly affected by Down Syndrome, it seems. Again there is a large trust fund - which seems to have impressed the Minister for Immi but it wouldn't impress anyone else. The legislation doesn't allow for money to come into it and I don't believe that it should (though again the current Minister seems to think otherwise.) I don't think that there should be two classes of migrant - the haves and the have nots. I think that that notion is very divisive socially and that it is a very bad idea. However I'm not even an Aussie and I live in the UK! I'm not the Aussie Government! The current Minister for Immi - Senator Chris Evans - does seem to be good at reading the will of the Australian voters. Paying for medicine is much more common in Oz than in the UK anyway and it could well be that the Aussie Voter would say, "You can come in to Oz with your disabled child as long as you don't expect me to pay any part of the bill." I don't know? Anyway, Dr Moeller also had to go to the MRT in order to make an application for Ministerial Intervention. He offered no further information about his child in the MRT. Apparently his son is very severely affected by Downs - if so, the RMOC would have reached the same decision as the MOC in any case. The national Press and media got hold of the Dr Moeller story. He seems to have done a deal with them whereby they could talk to him but they must leave his family alone - which seems reasonable to me. The Minister knew that the Moeller visa refusal was going to the MRT and then to the Minister, so he was ready & waiting. Mrs Robinson's legal team decided that the Minister should get on with it and grant her family's visas as well - which was done. The Moeller case was extraordinary. It went to the MRT one day and the Minister granted the visas at lunchtime the following day. This Minister can be very energetic when he tries, evidently! The two families got their PR visas in November 2008. The Aussie public were furious with the Minister that medical practitioners - one a doctor and the other a midwife - should have to go to these extraordinary lengths to get visas. Why can't it all be done quickly and quietly when the visa applicant is plainly of benefit to Australia? The Minister muttered that Aussie Law requires thus rigmarole. The Aussie voter shouted back, "Then change the bluddy law in that case!" Meanwhile in the Senate in Australia, some Committee or other was busy considering the effects of the international Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. I know almost nothing about the CRPD. Australia signed it and has now ratified it but I think the Aussies have used a Protocol. They either still say or they said at some point that Australia's Immigration Legislation would not be affected by the new Treaty. The Minister said that a Senate Inquiry would be set up in order to consider everything in the light of the CRPD. The Inquiry Secretary joined Poms in Oz to let our members know about the Inquiry because we are a very vocal bunch and several of our members have fallen foul of the Health requirement for migration - or have nearly done so. When I looked at the formal Terms of Reference about a year ago, they seemed too difficult to me. I think the Minister set the ToRs but the Committee Chairman decided they were too complicated as well. Whatever, the Committee came up with some simple terms and I can handle some of those. The thread is below: http://www.pomsinoz.com/forum/migration-issues/67292-have-your-say-health-requirement.html Sheelagh Blanckenberg RMA and I have been trying to encourage people to get involved. George Lombard is pretty scathing about the Inquiry. He is an Aussie who has worked in the Federal Government. He says that regardless of the Committee's findings, DIAC will go their own sweet way and according to George, DIAC are running a parallel inquiry of their own. You would have to ask George what DIAC are up to because I got the snippet of information from him and I don't know any more about DIAC's musings. One submission that you should definitely read is Dermot Hogan's, though: http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/mig/disability/subs/sub014.pdf http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/mig/disability/subs.htm Dermot is a member of PiO and he lives quite near me. He and I have spoken on the phone and Dermot is nobody's fool. His child Jake is also 8 and Jake has Down Syndrome. Dermot reads PiO regularly and if you send him a Private Message, he will definitely reply. His user details are here: http://www.pomsinoz.com/forum/members/hogand.html Dermot was refused a temporary 457 visa in 2009 because Jake has Downs. There are lots of ins and outs to the case. The employer is a hugely well known household name in Australia. They used Fragomen, who are a very large firm of migration agents. Unknown to the lady RMA at Fragomen, this particular employer is fully aware of the health requirements for temporary migrants. The employer can give an Undertaking which sorts everything out for a 457 visa. This particular employer has discussed the matter at Board level and as a matter of company policy, they refuse to give an employer's Undertaking. That was that. DIAC insisted on the Undertaking. The employer knows all the details of that and is streets ahead of most employers in Oz by knowing about it at all. They refused to provide it so the whole thing fell apart. There are various ways of playing the game but I'm not sure how well any of them really work. I agree with Quoll. If you are serious about moving to Oz then I think you should talk to George Lombard, whose details are here: Profile | George Lombard Consultancy Pty. Ltd. Cheers Gill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest vikkibee Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 Hi Vikkibee Welcome to Poms in Oz. My advice is that you should tread very carefully indeed. Quoll is absolutely right and I've seen people be royally ripped off as a result of consulting Registered Migration Agents who claimed to know all about the health requirement for migration when the reality was that the RMA didn't have a clue about it. One chap was assured that his 16 year old son would be "fine" when the boy was profoundly disabled in every possible way according to the father. The dimmest, dumbest RMA should have known that the boy stood no chance and that it would be completely irresponsible to relieve his parents of any money. The RMAs who really understand the Health requirement for migration properly are all in Australia. They are not stupid about window dressing the application and hoping that that will be enough. It is particularly difficult when the child has Down Syndrome becus many of the most hgh profile cases have involved children with Downs. Tracey Robinson is a British midwife in Perth. Freehills are a huge, commercial firm of solicitors in Australia and they do not normally get involved with Immigration at all. However they do have a Pro Bono legal team, which is a trendy idea these days and somebody involved Freehills Pro Bono. A chap called Steven Penglis was the Freehills Partner in charge of the case. The fuss about Down Syndrome began with the child in the Blair case in the Court in 2001. The child was about 10 and apparently he was badly affected by Down Syndrome - at any rate the Medical Officer of the Commonwealth thought so and the family didn't really argue otherwise. The family lost the case in spite of a lerge trust fund in favour of the child. A year later in 2002, along came Master Robinson. He was in Australia, courtesy of his mother, on a tenporary 457 visa. There had been no problem with getting the child a temporary visa but it all became very nasty once the mother's employers (a hospital) tried to sponsor her for Permanent Residency. Master Robinson was about 10. The MOC said that he was permanently disabled and did not meet the Health requirement for permanent migration. The argument was that if he got PR, he would be eiigible for Australia's Disabilty Support Pension after 10 years and entitled to Special Benefit in the meanwhile. Mrs Robinson had to go to the Migration Review Tribunal and she chose to involve the Review MOC. The RMOC re-did the meds from scratch and accepted new evidence that the child was not badly disabled - apparently he will be able to lead a normal life when he grows up. The RMOC insisted that the child was badly disabled. Steven Penglis realised that the MOC and the RMOC were both wrong. They were saying that in the worst cases of Downs, the person is very badly affected. That is as maybe but it was not true for young Master Robinson, so Mr Penglis took the case to the court in 2005 and argued the toss. The Judge agreed that the proper construction of PIC 4005 is that the MOC must consider the actual condition - and the actual degree and severity - involved. The MOC must not base his findings on some higher level of the condition because that amounts to generalisation, which the legislation does not allow. Good for Mr Penglis. It was a ground breaking decision that made new law. DIAC accepted the legal reasoning and the Judge's ruling in Robinson remains the law up till today. I'm British and I live in the UK. I've got law degrees etc in English law but I don't really know anything about Australian law and I'm not a a migration agent. Until 2008 I assumed that if you win in court in Australia, presumably someone gives you a visa and that is the end of it? George Lombard is an Aussie lawyer and he told me that this is not how it works. Apparently a win in court establishes legal principles but it merely restores the applicant and the Minister for Immi back to Square One, as if a visa application has never been made. An appeal to the MRT has to be made and it has to fail before the applicant can invoke S351 of the Migration Act 1958. S351 allows the applicant to appeal directly to the Minister for Immigration. If the Minister, acting in his/her sole discretion, decides that the public interest is best served by granting the visas then the Minister can grant them - regardless of any other considerations - but nobody else can do it. For some reason there were two Ministerial Appeals in Mrs Robinson's case. I don't know why there were two but that seems to be quite usual in Oz as well. This lengthy process is also very expensive unless Freehills do it at no reward to themselves. Mrs Robinson had to pay the out-of-pocket Court and Tribunal fees for her several cases but she did not have to pay anything for Freehills' time. They are a very expensive firm - fees for their time would have crippled a midwife if their Pro Bono team had not dealt with the whole thing. By 2008, Mrs Robinson's file was gathering dust in the Minister's office somewhere. Until Dr Moeller came along in rural VIC in 2008. Petals has referred to Dr Moeller in her post. Dr Moeller was in charge of acute care or something similar in a hospital in Horsham in rural Victoria. Apparently he was vital to allowing this hospital to care for acutely ill patients locally or something similar. Just as with Mrs Robinson, there had been no fuss when Dr Moeller obtained a temporary 457 visa for himself and his family - which includes Lukas Moeller. He is very badly affected by Down Syndrome, it seems. Again there is a large trust fund - which seems to have impressed the Minister for Immi but it wouldn't impress anyone else. The legislation doesn't allow for money to come into it and I don't believe that it should (though again the current Minister seems to think otherwise.) I don't think that there should be two classes of migrant - the haves and the have nots. I think that that notion is very divisive socially and that it is a very bad idea. However I'm not even an Aussie and I live in the UK! I'm not the Aussie Government! The current Minister for Immi - Senator Chris Evans - does seem to be good at reading the will of the Australian voters. Paying for medicine is much more common in Oz than in the UK anyway and it could well be that the Aussie Voter would say, "You can come in to Oz with your disabled child as long as you don't expect me to pay any part of the bill." I don't know? Anyway, Dr Moeller also had to go to the MRT in order to make an application for Ministerial Intervention. He offered no further information about his child in the MRT. Apparently his son is very severely affected by Downs - if so, the RMOC would have reached the same decision as the MOC in any case. The national Press and media got hold of the Dr Moeller story. He seems to have done a deal with them whereby they could talk to him but they must leave his family alone - which seems reasonable to me. The Minister knew that the Moeller visa refusal was going to the MRT and then to the Minister, so he was ready & waiting. Mrs Robinson's legal team decided that the Minister should get on with it and grant her family's visas as well - which was done. The Moeller case was extraordinary. It went to the MRT one day and the Minister granted the visas at lunchtime the following day. This Minister can be very energetic when he tries, evidently! The two families got their PR visas in November 2008. The Aussie public were furious with the Minister that medical practitioners - one a doctor and the other a midwife - should have to go to these extraordinary lengths to get visas. Why can't it all be done quickly and quietly when the visa applicant is plainly of benefit to Australia? The Minister muttered that Aussie Law requires thus rigmarole. The Aussie voter shouted back, "Then change the bluddy law in that case!" Meanwhile in the Senate in Australia, some Committee or other was busy considering the effects of the international Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. I know almost nothing about the CRPD. Australia signed it and has now ratified it but I think the Aussies have used a Protocol. They either still say or they said at some point that Australia's Immigration Legislation would not be affected by the new Treaty. The Minister said that a Senate Inquiry would be set up in order to consider everything in the light of the CRPD. The Inquiry Secretary joined Poms in Oz to let our members know about the Inquiry because we are a very vocal bunch and several of our members have fallen foul of the Health requirement for migration - or have nearly done so. When I looked at the formal Terms of Reference about a year ago, they seemed too difficult to me. I think the Minister set the ToRs but the Committee Chairman decided they were too complicated as well. Whatever, the Committee came up with some simple terms and I can handle some of those. The thread is below: http://www.pomsinoz.com/forum/migration-issues/67292-have-your-say-health-requirement.html Sheelagh Blanckenberg RMA and I have been trying to encourage people to get involved. George Lombard is pretty scathing about the Inquiry. He is an Aussie who has worked in the Federal Government. He says that regardless of the Committee's findings, DIAC will go their own sweet way and according to George, DIAC are running a parallel inquiry of their own. You would have to ask George what DIAC are up to because I got the snippet of information from him and I don't know any more about DIAC's musings. One submission that you should definitely read is Dermot Hogan's, though: http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/mig/disability/subs/sub014.pdf http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/mig/disability/subs.htm Dermot is a member of PiO and he lives quite near me. He and I have spoken on the phone and Dermot is nobody's fool. His child Jake is also 8 and Jake has Down Syndrome. Dermot reads PiO regularly and if you send him a Private Message, he will definitely reply. His user details are here: http://www.pomsinoz.com/forum/members/hogand.html Dermot was refused a temporary 457 visa in 2009 because Jake has Downs. There are lots of ins and outs to the case. The employer is a hugely well known household name in Australia. They used Fragomen, who are a very large firm of migration agents. Unknown to the lady RMA at Fragomen, this particular employer is fully aware of the health requirements for temporary migrants. The employer can give an Undertaking which sorts everything out for a 457 visa. This particular employer has discussed the matter at Board level and as a matter of company policy, they refuse to give an employer's Undertaking. That was that. DIAC insisted on the Undertaking. The employer knows all the details of that and is streets ahead of most employers in Oz by knowing about it at all. They refused to provide it so the whole thing fell apart. There are various ways of playing the game but I'm not sure how well any of them really work. I agree with Quoll. If you are serious about moving to Oz then I think you should talk to George Lombard, whose details are here: Profile | George Lombard Consultancy Pty. Ltd. Cheers Gill Dear Gill Thank you so much for the time you have taken to give me all the information above to digest, i am overwhelmed by the quick response and the help from everyone thanks again Bev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anitalund Posted January 18, 2013 Share Posted January 18, 2013 Hello I read this thread with particular interest as we are going through 457 visa application and our son has downs. Company is sponsoring my husband, paying for absolutely everything but we've been asked for independent psychologist report because my son has learning difficulties (although he attends main stream school so he's not badly affected). How did you get on? Anita Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Andy Posted January 18, 2013 Share Posted January 18, 2013 Hello I read this thread with particular interest as we are going through 457 visa application and our son has downs. Company is sponsoring my husband, paying for absolutely everything but we've been asked for independent psychologist report because my son has learning difficulties (although he attends main stream school so he's not badly affected). How did you get on? Anita hi Anita, you should start your own thread as this one is three years old so I suspect you will not get an answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanisa Posted July 26, 2017 Share Posted July 26, 2017 On 19/01/2013 at 02:27, Guest Andy said: hi Anita, you should start your own thread as this one is three years old so I suspect you will not get an answer. Hi, I am a new member myself.and in the similar shoe as you anita...my son is 3..we have been waiting over a year now for a reply for th 457 visa...how was the out come for your sons application back then? Tq Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.