The Brand New PIO Parents Visa thread

[vika]

On 17/01/2019 at 03:11, LindaH27 said:

Realistically? With a November 2017 date probably 6 years if not more,  sorry. People with a June/July  2015 date are only just been asked for documents now - processing these documents, Medicals and police clearances need to be carried out and then a 4-6 month wait for AOS so they are looking at around 4 years or so - and the queue numbers have drastically increased since then. 

Another point from your post. You say your parents are quite old and not in good health. Please be aware that 143 visa has a mandatory medical and if your parents do not meet the criteria they will not be granted the visa. Australia is very strict on its health conditions and is wary of taking on old people who will cost a lot in terms of health requirements and old age care. 

I just applied for my parents 143 PR last year (September 2018) - and I'm almost in tears reading this. Nothing we can do to push the PVC department to make our voices heard ?!?

 

[Nemesis]

2 hours ago, vika said:

I just applied for my parents 143 PR last year (September 2018) - and I'm almost in tears reading this. Nothing we can do to push the PVC department to make our voices heard ?!?

 

People waiting for Skills visa are in long queues. People waiting for spouse visas are in long queues. Thats just the way it works. I'm sorry but why should parent visas be able to get priority?

[ArafatG]

27 minutes ago, Nemesis said:

People waiting for Skills visa are in long queues. People waiting for spouse visas are in long queues. Thats just the way it works. I'm sorry but why should parent visas be able to get priority?

I don’t know about skilled visas queues but spouse visas are swift and normally issued from 6-12 months. I know a few friends who asked for me for help and it’s pretty much straight forward.  On the other hand Parent visas ( contributory subclass) has been delayed enermously so either the parent will fail at the medical or unfortunately lose interest. I was told 12-24 months even after getting in touch with them when i lodged back in June 2016 and now its like this year won’t be assessed so i kindly disagree with your priority jibe. No one asked that. We need the department to keep the promise they made that’s all. Best of luck for those who just applied it’s gonna be long and frustrating process. 

[Marisawright]

50 minutes ago, ArafatG said:

 We need the department to keep the promise they made that’s all. Best of luck for those who just applied it’s gonna be long and frustrating process. 

The department never makes promises.  All they ever do is give an indication of how long the queue is at any point in time.  

Consider also that the department can't predict how many people will be in the queues. If the number of people in a queue rises (which it has), processing will take longer.  

Also, politics plays a part.   If the government of the day is anti-immigration, which it is, then they will tell the dept to slow things down.     Australia needs skilled migrants so they won't slow those queus down - but it doesn't need partners or parents so those are easy targets, I'm afraid.  Just be glad they haven't closed the door altogether.

Edited January 18, 2019 by Marisawright

[ramot]

2 hours ago, ArafatG said:

I don’t know about skilled visas queues but spouse visas are swift and normally issued from 6-12 months. I know a few friends who asked for me for help and it’s pretty much straight forward.  On the other hand Parent visas ( contributory subclass) has been delayed enermously so either the parent will fail at the medical or unfortunately lose interest. I was told 12-24 months even after getting in touch with them when i lodged back in June 2016 and now its like this year won’t be assessed so i kindly disagree with your priority jibe. No one asked that. We need the department to keep the promise they made that’s all. Best of luck for those who just applied it’s gonna be long and frustrating process. 

Don’t know about spouse visas, but for partner visas,unless you have been together for over 3 years?  you need to have in most cases to have lived properly together as a couple before you can apply for the temporary visa, then after a further 2 years together you apply for PR, the granting of this took a further 9 months in my daughters case, so 3 years 9 months from first application. This was 6 years ago, have no idea of the up to date timescale, but many visas take time. I agree there is misinformation about the length of waiting times which is frustrating, but there is nothing you can do but wait your turn like the rest of us.

I don’t think I have ever seen the word ‘promised’ on a web site. 

Edited January 18, 2019 by ramot

[Judy]

Visa granted today, can't believe it. 

[Pertenhall]

3 minutes ago, Judy said:

Visa granted today, can't believe it. 

Fantastic news.  It is such a wonderful feeling isn't it?

[Rosiejaq]

14 minutes ago, Judy said:

Visa granted today, can't believe it. 

Congrats!  We’re still waiting to hear about AoS!

[ArafatG]

18 minutes ago, Judy said:

Visa granted today, can't believe it. 

Amazing news. Congrats Judy. Hopefully we are all next like magic haha

[LindaH27]

Congrats Judy!! At least you got in! 

I just hope Australia doesn’t copy New Zealand.  Apparently their government  closed the parent visa in October 2016 to new applicants. Only those who applied before then are still being processed - and you can’t have any dependants on the application! 

Best advice to everyone is to carry on with life as normal but I know how hard it is not to become downhearted. 

[Marilyn]

1 hour ago, Judy said:

Visa granted today, can't believe it. 

Congratulations Judy to you and your family who I am sure are just as excited and elated as you are. A wonderful life lies ahead of you. Please drop in once in awhile to let us know how you are fairing.

[vicky bajwa]

1 hour ago, Judy said:

Visa granted today, can't believe it. 

Congrats dear

[SusieRoo]

9 hours ago, vika said:

I just applied for my parents 143 PR last year (September 2018) - and I'm almost in tears reading this. Nothing we can do to push the PVC department to make our voices heard ?!?

 

There now are now over 50,000 applicants queuing for 143/173 visas. Only approximately 6000 places became available for each of the last two years and possibly even fewer this year. Sadly it’s going to take many years until they process your parent’s application. There is a new temporary visa class opening soon which may give your parents the option to move to Australia while waiting for the 143 visa.

[LindaH27]

@vika The new temporary visa will be an option for some but sadly not all. The full terms haven’t been published yet but as a rough guide  people have said the following will probably apply:-

Cost per person for 3 years $5000 bond or for 5 years $10000 bond - non refundable 

 Private health insurance must be maintained, no access to Medicare 

Before an application can be made the sponsor must be approved - no conditions stated yet but  the sponsor will most likely be expected  to have an specified income level as sponsor is expected to fund parents if necessary as there will be no recourse to public benefits

Parents probably  expected to show proof of funds to support themselves as not allowed to work 

Probably only  a limited number allowed every year 

As I said only an educated guess from reading immi website and other posts  but it’s far more expensive and restrictive from what the original campaigners were hoping for some years ago

 

[Majhar]

Congratulations to Judy and family. We applied 173 in 5th August 2015 not received any further communications except acknowledgement. 

[ramot]

8 hours ago, SusieRoo said:

There now are now over 50,000 applicants queuing for 143/173 visas. Only approximately 6000 places became available for each of the last two years and possibly even fewer this year. Sadly it’s going to take many years until they process your parent’s application. There is a new temporary visa class opening soon which may give your parents the option to move to Australia while waiting for the 143 visa.

If there are over 50,000 potential applications in the queue hoping to come to Australia in their old age, then I wouldn’t be surprised if the visa is curtailed. Even though I am in the queue I think the numbers are unsustainable. 

I do wonder what the theoretical 50,000 applications actually means.  That’s an enormous number of parents!!! Is that a combination of single parents applying plus couples wishing to come? eg possibly nearly 100,000 parents in total coming If most applications are mostly couples? Or does the 50,000 relate to the total number of people rather than the total number of applications,  eg possibly less applications, let’s say 30,000 couples could equal only 15,000 actual applications, 20,000 single parents applying equals out 35,000? Just a thought.

Does any one know the breakdown of how many  in the 143/173 queue?

[LindaH27]

I’m not sure but I would hazard a guess that it’s the total number of people ie parents and also their dependants (who can be up to the age of 23 on date of application ) 

Only because that’s the figure mentioned to Senator Mckim by the immigration department in his debate in  Parliament  last year about the numbers waiting. Yes as I said in an earlier post,   New Zealand  shut down their parent visa (which didn’t allow dependants) in 2016 and  I’m rsther concerned that  this may  happen in Australia  as well given the soaring numbers. Australia is currently assessing how to reduce  99 different visas to just 10 so there may be some big changes ahead and on past events they can arbritraily decide that people waiting can just be swept aside/sent home if they decide to end a visa. 

[Skeelsy]

Finally we got our letter from PVC to process our 173 into a 143. We followed all the instructions for my sister to apply via her mygov. However won’t let her apply without a CRN number. Says she has to apply for this for can apply to be our assurer.

We could have done this weeks ago and been ready now.

Have I missed something or do we really have to go through process of getting a CRN first. 

 

[LindaH27]

It’s needed to set up an online account with centrelink to link with Mygov 

 

https://www.humanservices.gov.au/individuals/subjects/centrelink-customer-reference-number-crn

[SusieRoo]

12 hours ago, ramot said:

If there are over 50,000 potential applications in the queue hoping to come to Australia in their old age, then I wouldn’t be surprised if the visa is curtailed. Even though I am in the queue I think the numbers are unsustainable. 

I do wonder what the theoretical 50,000 applications actually means.  That’s an enormous number of parents!!! Is that a combination of single parents applying plus couples wishing to come? eg possibly nearly 100,000 parents in total coming If most applications are mostly couples? Or does the 50,000 relate to the total number of people rather than the total number of applications,  eg possibly less applications, let’s say 30,000 couples could equal only 15,000 actual applications, 20,000 single parents applying equals out 35,000? Just a thought.

Does any one know the breakdown of how many  in the 143/173 queue?

I agree the numbers are now unsustainable and something will have to change.

It appears that the only concern of all western democracies today is the the economy and trade, not people and society.  So my guess is they will ramp up the cost of CPV and try to reduce the number of new (and existing) applicants. I also think the applications with dependent children could be prioritised, as these dependent children are most likely to be tax positive for the economy in the long term.

What's happening with the Australian general election have they set a date yet? Is there going to be another budget before the election? I expect the first budget of the new government is going to be significant for everyone in the parent visa queue.

[LBee]

Why would you think those with dependant children would have priority and these children potentially be tax positive once they get to Australia.  Previous posts have suggested (and I may be wrong here), that these dependants are generally mid 20’s and are dependant on their family - are they miraculously going to no longer be reliant on their families once they get a Visa - I think not, but that is my personal opinion.  

[Tulip1]

49 minutes ago, LBee said:

Why would you think those with dependant children would have priority and these children potentially be tax positive once they get to Australia.  Previous posts have suggested (and I may be wrong here), that these dependants are generally mid 20’s and are dependant on their family - are they miraculously going to no longer be reliant on their families once they get a Visa - I think not, but that is my personal opinion.  

I think it’s reasonable to assume few parents that arrive on a parent visa will work for many years and pay into the system. The reality is actually the opposite, they are likely one day to cost the country a lot of money in medical bills/old age care.  The ones in their late teens/early 20’s for example are likely to work into their 60s and beyond paying tax for many decades. You only hear on this forum about the ‘dependants’ that are mid 20’s because most are probably not true dependants and it understandably angers people. There are probably a great many more that are still at school or university that are dependent and will indeed give far more to the economy than parents in their 60’s/70’s/80’s. If you were running the country would you prefer old people who are a hip/knee replacement/heart problems/dementia/aged care dependent waiting to happen or a young healthy 20 + year old? Not being disrespectful to the elderly, it’s just fact. May well be me one day, of course someone 30 + years younger than me is a better bet. Im not saying they should be prioritised, I’m just responding to your post of why would someone think these children are tax positive, compared to old people who wouldn’t?

[SusieRoo]

Yes, that's exactly right. When a government's primary focus is for all things fiscal, people are categorised as tax positive or negative. Here is a small section from the 2016 immigration report which makes us all sound like very expensive babysitters.

"In 2008, the AGA estimated that in present value terms, the cumulated lifetime fiscal costs of a parent visa holder was between $230 000 and $285 000 per adult (AGA 2008). Using the AGA’s annually updated cost indexes (the ‘contributory parent visa composite index’), the estimated cost in 2015 is between around $335 000 and $410 000 per person (with the best’ estimate being just over $370 000). The actual charge applied is roughly one tenth of this cost for contributory visa holders and about 1 per cent for non-contributory visa holders."

Full report can be found here - https://www.pc.gov.au/inquiries/completed/migrant-intake/report/migrant-intake-report.pdf

[Marisawright]

15 minutes ago, SusieRoo said:

Yes, that's exactly right. When a government's primary focus is for all things fiscal, people are categorised as tax positive or negative.

But surely, how else can they do it?  We always talk about the cost to "the government", but the government has no money of its own.  Its only source of funds is me and other Australian taxpayers.   

[Wishfull]

1 hour ago, SusieRoo said:

Yes, that's exactly right. When a government's primary focus is for all things fiscal, people are categorised as tax positive or negative.

Why the assumption that parents are tax negative? We are already paying tax on our investments in Oz, albeit at a reduced rate as we are UK residents. As soon as we become Australian residents we will be paying tax on our UK  income from our pensions even though we will not be working. We may incur health costs in later years, although that is not a given, but we will not be having children who will need educating and will also incur health costs. Research conducted in the UK found that retirees in general were net contributors to society as they were not only helping with child care but were active in the voluntary sector.