475 Regional Family Sponsor - how long

[mandjay]

Does anyone know how long the processing time is for a 475 family sponsor, don't think we are on the CSL 'Building Associate'?:unsure:

[Kazzarazza]

Hi Mand & Ja

 

All DIAC are promising at the moment is that it will be processed before end 2012 (assuming end, is end of financial year making it 30th June). Our daughter has had her application in since Oct 2008 so I don't think you'll see much processing any time soon.

 

Sorry - probably not what you wanted to hear. It's very depressing.

 

Cheers, Kazza

[virtual_bajwa]

Does anyone know how long the processing time is for a 475 family sponsor, don't think we are on the CSL 'Building Associate'?:unsure:

Yes Matey,

I am afraid it's a very bad news. That according to DIAC website Family sponsored -non CSL have to wait since the end of 2012.

[Guest Gollywobbler]

Hi All

 

There is a bit of hope.

 

Welshtone is a migration agent called Tony Coates. Tony is particularly good at analysing DIAC's documents and working out how to push the law described by them.

 

I haven't seen the Ministerial Direction of 23rd September 2009. That is published on Legend.com and I'm too stingy to pay a substantial annual subscription fee to Legend when I'm not a migration agent and refuse to make any money out of people applying for Aussie visas. Registered Migration Agents are required to pay for access to the stuff like Legend.

 

Let us say that the applicant has applied for a Family sponsored subclass 475 visa. If he gets State sponsorship, he can't switch the Sponsor in this existing visa application. He would have to apply for a new 475 visa with a new Sponsor, though doing this would move his application from Cat 2 to Cat 5.

 

Apparently there is a loophole in the wording of the Ministerial Direction. Although a new application would be needed if the applicant were to apply for a State sponsored sc 475, this is not needed for the Ministerial Direction. The applicant could simply obtain State sponsorship and could thus move to Cat 5 - and be processed faster - under the Ministerial Direction.

 

Tony said in his e-mail to me that he is awaiting offical confirmation from DIAC's Policy people that Tony's interpretation is correct and that DIAC will interpret the Ministerial Direction in the way that Tony says.

 

Sometime last week or the week before, a Family sponsored sc 475 applicant sent me a copy of an e-mail that Mr Wilden had sent her. In it, Mr Wilden told the lady exactly what Tony is now saying - if she can get State sponsorship then she can be treated as a Cat 5 applicant and processed as such - ie faster - even though a Family sponsored sc 475 visa is the one that will be granted.

 

I was intrigued by Mr Wilden's liberal interpretation of the wording of the Ministerial Direction but didn't give it much thought. I don't do this stuff for a living. I mentioned Mr Wilden's statement to someone else on here but apart from that I forgot about it till Tony mentioned it again the other day.

 

When he did, I replied to Tony saying that Mr Wilden is definitely making the same suggestion as him. I gave Tony Mr Wilden's direct details and suggested a word between the two of them. Tony responded, saying that he wants official confirmation from DIAC's policy section in Canberra. That will stick to the wall at the ASPC whereas assurances from Mr Wilden won't necessarily do so.

 

A potential problem that many of the Family sponsored sc 475 applicants will run into is that even if the State they want to move do did once offer sc 475 sponsorship for the occupation concerned, they aren't still offering it now. However all of the States have the power to copy WA and to offer sc 475 sponsorship to any applicant whose skill is on the SOL. This is what WA say:

 

State Migration Centre » Skilled Regional Sponsored Visa

 

Let us say that your skills assessment and your visa application both nominate either Office Manager or Project/Program Administrator. If WA could secure approval from one of the 9 RDCs in WA, WA would offer sc 475 sponsorship even though the occupations I have mentioned are not on their WAOIDL List. With the sc 475 visa, the State sponsors the applicant, not the occupation. Also, with the SRS 475 visa a State can offer as many of these "off list" sponsorships as it likes, whereas each State is confined to 500 only off list sponsorships for the sc 176 visa.

 

ALL the States have the power to do the same as WA choose to do. There isn't one rule for WA and a different rule for all other States.

 

I think there are 3 caveats with the idea.

 

1. The States might refuse to get involved with this interpretation of the Ministerial Direction;

 

2. The relevant occupation might have been on the relevant State's own List at some stage but might have been removed from it because the State reckons there is no further need to push the particular occupation. Loads of Office Managers might already be on their way to SA, for example, and SA might not want any more;

 

3. DIAC's Policy people might decide to interpret the Ministerial Direction narrowly. They might say that they will accept the State sponsored idea if the occupation is on a given State's own lists at the time of the application for State sponsorship but that DIAC don't think that off-list sc 475 sponsorships can be used in the same way and for the purpose of the Ministerial Direction.

 

If DIAC did say the above (no 3) I think there would be a row. People would look into the exact rules about sc 475 sponsorship by a State and they would argue that since there is no distinction in the Ministerial Direction, DIAC are bound to accept off-list State sponsorships as well as on-list ones.

 

My feeling is that where appropriate, it will be worth having a word with the State Migration manager in the relevant State. In WA I believe that the new chap is called Mr Randall. In SA it is definitely Anne Johnson. In VIC I believe that Cherie McMahon is the person to speak with. I don't know the names in any of the remaining States but it is not too difficult to ring up the State concerned and to ask whoever answers the phone what the name of that State's Manager is.

 

It wouldn't be appropriate in the ACT because the ACT does not sponsor for the sc 475 visa.

 

Whereas WA simply rely on the SOL, the NT relies on its own Occupations Shortage List, which is here:

 

http://www.nt.gov.au/dbe/employment/workforce_nt/docs/nt_occupation_shortage_list.pdf

 

It is wider than their main List but is not comprehensive. The NT may not need some of the occupations on the SOL. The NT agree that they can sponsor for any occupation on the SOL but they have said in the past that they won't do so without a job offer in the NT.

 

Still, for some people this new idea may well be worth a go.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

[virtual_bajwa]

Hi All

 

There is a bit of hope.

 

Welshtone is a migration agent called Tony Coates. Tony is particularly good at analysing DIAC's documents and working out how to push the law described by them.

 

I haven't seen the Ministerial Direction of 23rd September 2009. That is published on Legend.com and I'm too stingy to pay a substantial annual subscription fee to Legend when I'm not a migration agent and refuse to make any money out of people applying for Aussie visas. Registered Migration Agents are required to pay for access to the stuff like Legend.

 

Let us say that the applicant has applied for a Family sponsored subclass 475 visa. If he gets State sponsorship, he can't switch the Sponsor in this existing visa application. He would have to apply for a new 475 visa with a new Sponsor, though doing this would move his application from Cat 2 to Cat 5.

 

Apparently there is a loophole in the wording of the Ministerial Direction. Although a new application would be needed if the applicant were to apply for a State sponsored sc 475, this is not needed for the Ministerial Direction. The applicant could simply obtain State sponsorship and could thus move to Cat 5 - and be processed faster - under the Ministerial Direction.

 

Tony said in his e-mail to me that he is awaiting offical confirmation from DIAC's Policy people that Tony's interpretation is correct and that DIAC will interpret the Ministerial Direction in the way that Tony says.

 

Sometime last week or the week before, a Family sponsored sc 475 applicant sent me a copy of an e-mail that Mr Wilden had sent her. In it, Mr Wilden told the lady exactly what Tony is now saying - if she can get State sponsorship then she can be treated as a Cat 5 applicant and processed as such - ie faster - even though a Family sponsored sc 475 visa is the one that will be granted.

 

I was intrigued by Mr Wilden's liberal interpretation of the wording of the Ministerial Direction but didn't give it much thought. I don't do this stuff for a living. I mentioned Mr Wilden's statement to someone else on here but apart from that I forgot about it till Tony mentioned it again the other day.

 

When he did, I replied to Tony saying that Mr Wilden is definitely making the same suggestion as him. I gave Tony Mr Wilden's direct details and suggested a word between the two of them. Tony responded, saying that he wants official confirmation from DIAC's policy section in Canberra. That will stick to the wall at the ASPC whereas assurances from Mr Wilden won't necessarily do so.

 

A potential problem that many of the Family sponsored sc 475 applicants will run into is that even if the State they want to move do did once offer sc 475 sponsorship for the occupation concerned, they aren't still offering it now. However all of the States have the power to copy WA and to offer sc 475 sponsorship to any applicant whose skill is on the SOL. This is what WA say:

 

State Migration Centre » Skilled Regional Sponsored Visa

 

Let us say that your skills assessment and your visa application both nominate either Office Manager or Project/Program Administrator. If WA could secure approval from one of the 9 RDCs in WA, WA would offer sc 475 sponsorship even though the occupations I have mentioned are not on their WAOIDL List. With the sc 475 visa, the State sponsors the applicant, not the occupation. Also, with the SRS 475 visa a State can offer as many of these "off list" sponsorships as it likes, whereas each State is confined to 500 only off list sponsorships for the sc 176 visa.

 

ALL the States have the power to do the same as WA choose to do. There isn't one rule for WA and a different rule for all other States.

 

I think there are 3 caveats with the idea.

 

1. The States might refuse to get involved with this interpretation of the Ministerial Direction;

 

2. The relevant occupation might have been on the relevant State's own List at some stage but might have been removed from it because the State reckons there is no further need to push the particular occupation. Loads of Office Managers might already be on their way to SA, for example, and SA might not want any more;

 

3. DIAC's Policy people might decide to interpret the Ministerial Direction narrowly. They might say that they will accept the State sponsored idea if the occupation is on a given State's own lists at the time of the application for State sponsorship but that DIAC don't think that off-list sc 475 sponsorships can be used in the same way and for the purpose of the Ministerial Direction.

 

If DIAC did say the above (no 3) I think there would be a row. People would look into the exact rules about sc 475 sponsorship by a State and they would argue that since there is no distinction in the Ministerial Direction, DIAC are bound to accept off-list State sponsorships as well as on-list ones.

 

My feeling is that where appropriate, it will be worth having a word with the State Migration manager in the relevant State. In WA I believe that the new chap is called Mr Randall. In SA it is definitely Anne Johnson. In VIC I believe that Cherie McMahon is the person to speak with. I don't know the names in any of the remaining States but it is not too difficult to ring up the State concerned and to ask whoever answers the phone what the name of that State's Manager is.

 

It wouldn't be appropriate in the ACT because the ACT does not sponsor for the sc 475 visa.

 

Whereas WA simply rely on the SOL, the NT relies on its own Occupations Shortage List, which is here:

 

http://www.nt.gov.au/dbe/employment/workforce_nt/docs/nt_occupation_shortage_list.pdf

 

It is wider than their main List but is not comprehensive. The NT may not need some of the occupations on the SOL. The NT agree that they can sponsor for any occupation on the SOL but they have said in the past that they won't do so without a job offer in the NT.

 

Still, for some people this new idea may well be worth a go.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

Thanks matey,

This is a some good news but it all depends upon DIAC whom they accept or not.

 

I am Public Relation Officer. My brother sponsored me from Melbourne. So can you please describe how can I approach Victoria for state sponsorship....

My detailed timeline is mentioned in the signature...

[Guest Gollywobbler]

Thanks matey,

This is a some good news but it all depends upon DIAC whom they accept or not.

 

I am Public Relation Officer. My brother sponsored me from Melbourne. So can you please describe how can I approach Victoria for state sponsorship....

My detailed timeline is mentioned in the signature...

 

 

Hi VB

 

I'm not a migration agent.

 

George Lombard is used to dealing with Cherie McMahon in VIC, whereas I've never even spoken with her:

 

Profile | George Lombard Consultancy Pty. Ltd.

 

State & Territory Migration Sites - australia.gov.au

 

I'm sure that you already have the link above but others may not.

 

Turning to VIC:

 

Immigrate to Work and Live in Melbourne and Regional Victoria, Australia - Live in Victoria

 

Skilled - Regional Sponsored (475 and 487) Visas - Live in Victoria

 

VIC say that they will sometimes consider applications for off list nominations for the sc 475 visa Provided That.... Please read the final section on the page above.

 

Realistically, do you have any chances of finding employment as a Public Relations Officer anywhere in VIC? Have you investigated the possibilities fully? If what VIC say is technically feasible for you in Regional VIC, Cherie McMahon might be swayed by the twin thoughts that (a) what you want is feasible; and (b) being in VIC would put you closer to your brother than being elsewhere in Australia.

 

However bear in mind, please: In VIC, your brother could sponsor for the sc 475 visa even if he lives in Greater Melbourne and if he sponsors you, you would be able to move to Greater Melbourne I think (though I am not sure about the letter point but I am definitely right about your brother's location.) State sponsorship is more restrictive in VIC. The State would not help you to get to Greater Melbourne.

 

The details are on the DIAC website, dealing with the sc 475 visa:

 

Skilled – Regional Sponsored (Provisional) Visa (Subclass 475)

 

AusPost is excellent for working out which bits are Regional and which aren't, which depends the identity of the Sponsor:

 

Australia Post - Postcode Search

 

I find that the map in the List for the State sponsored sc 475 visa is even better myself - I respond to pictures, not to numbers:

 

http://www.liveinvictoria.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0013/20821/Skilled-Regional-Sponsored-Eligibility_July09.pdf

 

Don't jump in with all four feet and get the whole thing wrong. Pay George for some help if you are in any doubt at all.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

[mandjay]

Thanks for the replies..still confused, does it make a difference in the timeline if we are on the SOL list?

[Guest Gollywobbler]

Thanks for the replies..still confused, does it make a difference in the timeline if we are on the SOL list?

 

 

Hi Mandjay

 

What nakes a difference to the processing times for getting your visa is whether you are in Category 5 or Category 6, determined in accordance with the DIAC-produced official document in the link below:

 

http://www.immi.gov.au/skilled/general-skilled-migration/pdf/faq-priority-processing.pdf

 

Cheers

 

Gill

[Kazzarazza]

A potential problem that many of the Family sponsored sc 475 applicants will run into is that even if the State they want to move do did once offer sc 475 sponsorship for the occupation concerned, they aren't still offering it now. However all of the States have the power to copy WA and to offer sc 475 sponsorship to any applicant whose skill is on the SOL.

 

 

Hi Gill,

 

I can confirm we (our daughter) also got the same email suggestion from Mr Wilden.

 

There wasn't any explanation of how best to go about it and, knowing her occupation wasn't on the SA list anymore, we dismissed it and resigned ourselves to a very long wait, having exhausted all options. Mr Wilden had been our last hope after more than a year of disappointments.

 

However, the paragraph above has given us renewed hope and we will try to talk to Ann Johnson direct. I did try to discuss the best way to apply for an "off-list" sponsorship for a 475 applicant with another member of staff a few weeks ago but, to be honest, was very disappointed with reply which basically was "she's no chance"!!

 

We'll keep on fighting and let you know how we go.

 

Cheers, Kazza

[Guest Gollywobbler]

Hi Kazza

 

Right. You've seen the suggestion in an e-mail from Mr Wilden to you and you have the e-mail to prove it.

 

The next thing you need to do is to ring Immi SA again and INSIST to them that you want Anne Johnson's e-mail address because David Wilden is DIAC's Regional Director for Europe, is very senior and he wouldn't make the suggestion which he has made unless he had cleared it with the Policy Sections and the ASPC first. Tell them that you want to forward this e-mail to Ms Johnson because if she can help your daughter, only someone of her seniority can decide to do it. The ordinary staff can't. So if they won't give you Ms Johnson's e-mail address, you want to speak with Ms Johnson's secretary so that you can arrange a face to face meeting with Ms Johnson instead. That ought to get her e-mail address, I would think. Or you could go there in person to sort this out - as you prefer.

 

Junior staff hate being told that they are too lowly to be able to make decisions on their own but sometimes they just have to be overridden and told that they are too lowly, whether they like it or not.

 

However let us say that Ms Johnson agrees that she will sponsor your daughter's occupation just this once in order to help a family which already lives in SA and where your daughter is therefore likely to make her own life, long-term, as well. (Depriving families of family unity is completely wrong according to the Human Rights lawyers in Oz, so you could chuck that in for good measure!)

 

If Ms Johnson agrees to the above, she will NOT also waive all the other requirements for SA State sponsorship for the sc 475 visa, though. Therefore are you absolutely certain that your daughter would be able to comply with all of SA's other requirements as well if she were to apply to them for State sponsorship today?

 

Make The Move :: General skilled migration

 

Sponsorship requirements for Offshore 475 or 176

 

As with Virtual Bajwa, do not go off at half cock. You have to make it easy for the State Manager to say yes because if you make that difficult, the Manager will say no instead.

 

Given that you have the e-mail from David Wilden, you may feel more comfortable if you forward that to George Lombard and ask him to work his magic on Anne Johnson instead. He has dealt with her lots of times. She respects him.

 

There was a case last year where an RMA kept howling, "No State has ever made the XYZ Exception before." George ignored the other RMA and contacted Anne Johnson. As he said at the time, he thought he might well have to wheedle her for at least 20 or 30 minutes. I don't know how much wheedling was needed in the end but she agreed to help George by making the XYZ Exception.

 

That said, I also know a British GP who needed some information from Ms Johnson. I told the GP, "Phone them, howl that you are a doctor and that it is a medical issue which you want to discuss in private about a member of your family." She did that and got through to Ms Johnson with no problems at all.

 

So Ms Johnson may well be very approachable without your needing to involve George but I don't know what the lady is like because I know only her by name - I've never dealt with her in any way at all.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

[virtual_bajwa]

As with Virtual Bajwa, do not go off at half cock. You have to make it easy for the State Manager to say yes because if you make that difficult, the Manager will say no instead.[/Quote]

 

I am sorry I could not understand what this phrase on me means.

And thank you very much for providing more and information. But one thing here is very clear that this stuff is very confusing. I applied through a very good agent from Melbourne. So it would be very hard to tell him that I want state sponsorship from off-list category.

And there are many questions to raised out of it...

1. Do I have to sacrifice my earlier class when I apply for state sponsorship.

2. Is it possible to convert class UZ subclass 496 category 475 visa.

3. I am at the last stage of processing of visa...so is well worth to go for state sponsorship.

4. Will it cost me more while I got for the state sponsorship?

[Guest Gollywobbler]

Hi VB

 

"Going off at half cock" is an English, idiomatic expression. It does NOT have a rude meaning, you will be happy to hear! It is to do with shotguns. I've never been allowed to hold a shotgun unless the cartridges have been removed from it and the gun is 100% safe for someone who doesn't know how to use one. People who understand guns are incredibly fussy about letting a twit like me go anywhere near one unless they have made the gun completely harmless first.

 

The gist of the expression is that if a fool like me is carrying a gun which is loaded, accidents could happen and I could shoot myself through the foot instead of shooting at the bird in the air. The bird is the proper target, not my foot!

 

In Kazza's case I used the expression in its usual sense, which is "Do not take any risks." If Kazza's daughter does not meet any of SA's other requirements then no matter how much the Manager might want to help, she will have to refuse any application for State sponsorship anyway. In that situation, there is no point in wasting the Manager's time.

 

I applied through a very good agent from Melbourne. So it would be very hard to tell him that I want state sponsorship from off-list category.

 

This bit would not be at all difficult. The VIC page says that what you hope to do is technically feasible. If he reads the page he can see that for himself. Whether it will be possible in practice depends on whether there is a genuine need for PR Officers in the Regions in VIC. It is up to you to find out about the practical feasibility by studying all the job adverts you can find and keeping a record of them.

 

You are the PR person so you will know from the adverts whether you have the right sort of experience for the jobs (if any) which are advertised etc. Mr Wilden was not describing some sort of short cut. He was describing a huge amount of hard work by the visa applicants.

 

1. Do I have to sacrifice my earlier class when I apply for state sponsorship.

 

No - you leave your visa application completely alone. You simply apply for State sponsorship as well in order to get yourself into priority processing category 5. Your agent has access to the Ministerial Direction so he can understand why the theory works from reading the Direction itself.

 

2. Is it possible to convert class UZ subclass 496 category 475 visa.

 

No - it is not possible to convert and there is no reason to do so. The State merely has to ensure that the State understands that it is being asked to give approval for a sc 496 sponsorship - which is not difficult to follow. The Agent can explain all the facts to the Manager of VIC Immi.

 

3. I am at the last stage of processing of visa...so is well worth to go for state sponsorship.

 

If you can get State sponsorship it would move your application from Cat 6 to Cat 5. The Cat 5s have to be processed before the Cat 6s can be processed. Whether it is worth the bother of the exercise depends on how many PR Officer jobs are available and where they are available, I believe. If they are not available in provincial VIC then VIC would not give you State sponsorship for a regional visa anyway. So start by examining the jobs in the regional parts of VIC, please. The Agent won't do that part of the work for you - you and your brother will need to do it between you, I suggest.

 

4. Will it cost me more while I got for the state sponsorship?

 

VIC does not charge for an application for State sponsorship. DIAC would not make any extra charge either. Your Agent might well charge extra but that is a private matter between you and him. You can leave him out of the State sponsorship possibility unless and until you get the State sponsorship if you wish.

 

However I'd ask the Agent how well he knows the team at VIC Immi and I would not put up with vague, waffly replies about this - he either knows the VIC State Govt Immi people well or he doesn't, so which is it?

 

Cheers

 

Gill

[virtual_bajwa]

However I'd ask the Agent how well he knows the team at VIC Immi and I would not put up with vague, waffly replies about this - he either knows the VIC State Govt Immi people well or he doesn't, so which is it?[/Quote]

Thanks again for the reply.

But things are very confusing. My brother talked to my agent yesterday. My agent told me that there is no need for the state sponsorship. As DIAC is going to open old pending cases in coming months. He told me that the processing of my case is in the last stage . I have to be patient as they will give some decision in coming few months. So I do not have any other option but to go with my agent's believe.

[Guest Gollywobbler]

Hi VB

 

As DIAC is going to open old pending cases in coming months.

 

Is your agent Glenn Pereira in Melbourne? If yes then Glenn could be right because he does have a lot of inside knowledge. If your agent is not Glenn then I'd put the above claim down to nothing more than the agent's guessing, myself.

 

However if you want to believe your agent and you think the visa will happen soon, I'd leave the whole thing alone and wait to see whether the agent's claims come true - or not.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

[virtual_bajwa]

Hi VB

 

 

Is your agent Glenn Pereira in Melbourne? If yes then Glenn could be right because he does have a lot of inside knowledge. If your agent is not Glenn then I'd put the above claim down to nothing more than the agent's guessing, myself.

 

However if you want to believe your agent and you think the visa will happen soon, I'd leave the whole thing alone and wait to see whether the agent's claims come true - or not.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

 

No, Gilli he is not Glenn. He is somebody from the Indian origin and based in Melbourne. And he is a good MARA agent.

I know I am bothering you too much. But there are some people on earth whom you believe are angels. And you are proved to be one of them.

I have another question to ask you.And My MARA agent was on the agent's list on MARA website, but today when I found him he is no more there. What could be the possibility?

I can not name him due to the personal reasons. but I do not have any other option other than believing him.I paid all the amount in the advance to him.....

[Guest Gollywobbler]

No, Gilli he is not Glenn. He is somebody from the Indian origin and based in Melbourne. And he is a good MARA agent.

I know I am bothering you too much. But there are some people on earth whom you believe are angels. And you are proved to be one of them.

I have another question to ask you.And My MARA agent was on the agent's list on MARA website, but today when I found him he is no more there. What could be the possibility?

I can not name him due to the personal reasons. but I do not have any other option other than believing him.I paid all the amount in the advance to him.....

 

Hi VB

 

And My MARA agent was on the agent's list on MARA website, but today when I found him he is no more there. What could be the possibility?

 

 

Hmmmm. Puzzling. Have you checked the list of lapsed agents?

 

https://www.mara.gov.au/AgentLapsed/ALSearch.aspx?FolderID=396

 

I am not sure but I believe that if an agent's annual registration ended on 25th Jamuary 2010, let us say, I think the computer automatically moves the person to the list of lapsed agents even though he applied for renewal ages ago etc. I think it is just an administrative quirk of the computer as far as I know. When the agent's new registration is sorted out, I believe that the computer moves him back to the main list automatically.

 

If he is not on the list of lapsed agents then I would check the list of sanctioned agents after that:

 

https://www.mara.gov.au/AgentSanctioned/ASSearch.aspx?FolderID=395

 

If the man has completely vanished from OMARA's computer system, I would suspect the OMARA computer before I would suspect the man. OMARA is run by two senior DIAC Officers. The Lists used to be in pdf format and were a complete pain to use. OMARA said that this was because they had taken over the commercial computer system used by the Migration Institute of Australia (the MIA) but the commercial system wasn't compatible with DIAC's system or something.

 

The new OMARA website only began recently. I don't check it every day - maybe only about once a month. When I last checked it about a month ago, the difficult-to-work temporary Government system had gone and was replaced by the current system.

 

The 'new' system looks exactly like the old MIA-operated website to me. It could be that they have fixed whatever the problems were in the MIA system and have made the thing compatible with the DIAC computer but I don't know for sure. I know nothing about IT but all the chopping and changing with the computer system could have caused some of the data to become 'corrupted' - ie lost, I would suspect. I am guessing but I wouldn't be surprised if the new system is not foolproof as yet.

 

Therefore if you can't find your agent on the OMARA computer anywhere, I really would suspect the computer and not the man unless you learn something definite to the contrary. Therefore if a thorough search the OMARA Lists does not produce the man, my next step would be to ask your brother to ask the man why he has vanished from OMARA's new lists? There could well be a computer problem that he knows nothing about but if so then the agent is the man who can make a fuss and get OMARA's computer sorted out.

 

If it were me, I'd do all the searches really carefully and/or again, making sure that the spelling is correct etc. If the man really has vanished from the OMARA system when you say that the man himself is totally reputable, then I would still suspect the computer and I would ask the man whether he can explain why the computer has 'lost' him?

 

My own belief is that interfering with or copying existing computer systems is sure to cause computer problems, frankly. (There is an old English/American saying which goes, "It it ain't broke then don't fix it!") I do think that quite a lot of fixing has gone on with a system that was not broken in the first place because the 'repairs' or whatever DIAC were doing have taken months rather than weeks.

 

I'd suggest that you send me a Private Message with the agent's name. I can find out whether he is one of the people mentioned - but not named - by the Press. The Press did not name anyone as far as I know. If you want to PM me with the man's name, I might be able to discover something but I can't gaurantee to be able to do so.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

[virtual_bajwa]

Hi VB

 

 

 

Hmmmm. Puzzling. Have you checked the list of lapsed agents?

 

https://www.mara.gov.au/AgentLapsed/ALSearch.aspx?FolderID=396

 

I am not sure but I believe that if an agent's annual registration ended on 25th Jamuary 2010, let us say, I think the computer automatically moves the person to the list of lapsed agents even though he applied for renewal ages ago etc. I think it is just an administrative quirk of the computer as far as I know. When the agent's new registration is sorted out, I believe that the computer moves him back to the main list automatically.

 

If he is not on the list of lapsed agents then I would check the list of sanctioned agents after that:

 

https://www.mara.gov.au/AgentSanctioned/ASSearch.aspx?FolderID=395

 

If the man has completely vanished from OMARA's computer system, I would suspect the OMARA computer before I would suspect the man. OMARA is run by two senior DIAC Officers. The Lists used to be in pdf format and were a complete pain to use. OMARA said that this was because they had taken over the commercial computer system used by the Migration Institute of Australia (the MIA) but the commercial system wasn't compatible with DIAC's system or something.

 

The new OMARA website only began recently. I don't check it every day - maybe only about once a month. When I last checked it about a month ago, the difficult-to-work temporary Government system had gone and was replaced by the current system.

 

The 'new' system looks exactly like the old MIA-operated website to me. It could be that they have fixed whatever the problems were in the MIA system and have made the thing compatible with the DIAC computer but I don't know for sure. I know nothing about IT but all the chopping and changing with the computer system could have caused some of the data to become 'corrupted' - ie lost, I would suspect. I am guessing but I wouldn't be surprised if the new system is not foolproof as yet.

 

Therefore if you can't find your agent on the OMARA computer anywhere, I really would suspect the computer and not the man unless you learn something definite to the contrary. Therefore if a thorough search the OMARA Lists does not produce the man, my next step would be to ask your brother to ask the man why he has vanished from OMARA's new lists? There could well be a computer problem that he knows nothing about but if so then the agent is the man who can make a fuss and get OMARA's computer sorted out.

 

If it were me, I'd do all the searches really carefully and/or again, making sure that the spelling is correct etc. If the man really has vanished from the OMARA system when you say that the man himself is totally reputable, then I would still suspect the computer and I would ask the man whether he can explain why the computer has 'lost' him?

 

My own belief is that interfering with or copying existing computer systems is sure to cause computer problems, frankly. (There is an old English/American saying which goes, "It it ain't broke then don't fix it!") I do think that quite a lot of fixing has gone on with a system that was not broken in the first place because the 'repairs' or whatever DIAC were doing have taken months rather than weeks.

 

I'd suggest that you send me a Private Message with the agent's name. I can find out whether he is one of the people mentioned - but not named - by the Press. The Press did not name anyone as far as I know. If you want to PM me with the man's name, I might be able to discover something but I can't gaurantee to be able to do so.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

 

Oh I found him today with a beautiful picture with specs. I found him. No need to be worried for me. He is very much there. Now My next target would be to go ahead with the state sponsorship.

But similarly I do not want to sacrifice my 496 visa class. Let us find something.

[Guest chilichilibombom]

Hi all,

I assessed exactly June 2th and as a result I was involved to new rules related to Australia government.

To cut a long story short, I missed subclass 176 and now I am waiting for 475 visa.

Can any body advise me? I mean have you ever heard something like this about anybody else?

Regards,

:-(

[virtual_bajwa]

Hi all,

I assessed exactly June 2th and as a result I was involved to new rules related to Australia government.

To cut a long story short, I missed subclass 176 and now I am waiting for 475 visa.

Can any body advise me? I mean have you ever heard something like this about anybody else?

Regards,

:-(

 

We ready for longggggggggg wait dear...

[samk6]

We ready for longggggggggg wait dear...

 

hi

if your occupation is listed on new SOL, You are belong New Priority Group 04(old 03).

Currently they are processing August - September 2010 applications. I am waiting for DAIC latest update. Most probably they will release it on today......

 

http://www.immi.gov.au/skilled/gener...fact-sheet.pdf

:wubclub:

[Guest chilichilibombom]

Hi all,

I assessed exactly June 2th and as a result I was involved to new rules related to Australia government.

To cut a long story short, I missed subclass 176 and now I am waiting for 475 visa.

Can any body advise me? I mean have you ever heard something like this about anybody else?

Regards,

:-(

Sorry June 27th not 2th...!

:dull:

[Guest chilichilibombom]

hi

if your occupation is listed on new SOL, You are belong New Priority Group 04(old 03).

Currently they are processing August - September 2010 applications. I am waiting for DAIC latest update. Most probably they will release it on today......

 

http://www.immi.gov.au/skilled/gener...fact-sheet.pdf

:wubclub:

Your PDF link has been transferred!

I already assessed for visa subclass 176 in electronic engineer (233411) + IELTS 6 !

could you more explain please!

[samk6]

Your PDF link has been transferred!

I already assessed for visa subclass 176 in electronic engineer (233411) + IELTS 6 !

could you more explain please!

 

what do you want to know? :idea: