The Brand New PIO Parents Visa thread

[Kathss56]

Just now, LindaH27 said:

Phew! That’s a big relief - so glad to hear that.  

Thanks Linda. Xmas in Oz and new house move 16 Dec  

[LindaH27]

1 minute ago, Kathss56 said:

Thanks Linda. Xmas in Oz and new house move 16 Dec  

Exciting - so much to look forward to! I’m only 15 months behind you but think I’ll be waiting  years yet ! keep thinking about 600 but there’s no guarantee I wouldn’t get the 12 in 18 months clause - which I don’t really want. Thinking of 870 but  not sure whether to go for the 5 year rather than the 3 with the numbers in the queue - it’s all extra money ! 

[Kathss56]

2 minutes ago, LindaH27 said:

Exciting - so much to look forward to! I’m only 15 months behind you but think I’ll be waiting  years yet ! keep thinking about 600 but there’s no guarantee I wouldn’t get the 12 in 18 months clause - which I don’t really want. Thinking of 870 but  not sure whether to go for the 5 year rather than the 3 with the numbers in the queue - it’s all extra money ! 

Thankyou.
So hard!  Maybe the next 6-12mths will give you more clarity on the decision 🥴

[BargeUK]

5 hours ago, LindaH27 said:

Exciting - so much to look forward to! I’m only 15 months behind you but think I’ll be waiting  years yet ! keep thinking about 600 but there’s no guarantee I wouldn’t get the 12 in 18 months clause - which I don’t really want. Thinking of 870 but  not sure whether to go for the 5 year rather than the 3 with the numbers in the queue - it’s all extra money ! 

I totally understand how you feel.  We kept looking at every possible option of just how we could spend more time in Australia while we were waiting but everything kept coming back to the uncertainty of the final outcome.  We were advised that with a 3 year 600 we just had to leave for a weekend at the end of every 12 months so we were all prepared to go, along with our beloved retriever, only to find out at the last moment that the weekend leave was actually 6 months!  We obviously couldn't fly our dog backwards and forwards and we couldn't leave her with our son as they are both out at work all day so we had to abandon that.  We then considered the 870 but, by the time it got going, we were advised that we were close enough to the front of the queue for it not to be worth the extra expense.  That turned out to be good advice as things started moving quickly towards the end of last year but unfortunately the virus wrecked everything the whole world over!  So now here we all are - in limbo with our lives on hold just waiting and wondering with our fingers and toes crossed for the success of the vaccine....

[Kathss56]

@BargeUK they are getting through them quickly at the moment!! Let’s hope the next 6 months brings a bit of clarity for you

[Juniper]

6 hours ago, LindaH27 said:

Exciting - so much to look forward to! I’m only 15 months behind you but think I’ll be waiting  years yet ! keep thinking about 600 but there’s no guarantee I wouldn’t get the 12 in 18 months clause - which I don’t really want. Thinking of 870 but  not sure whether to go for the 5 year rather than the 3 with the numbers in the queue - it’s all extra money ! 

Linda - we are thinking in exactly the same way as you!  
We would have nowhere to return to in the UK during the term of a 600 so it really has to be the 870 but as you say - for 3 or 5 years? 
Then I worry that they may be a rush of applicants for the 870 who are obviously all in the same position as ourselves.  Am I right in thinking there is quite a low annual limit on the number of 870’s granted? 

 

[LindaH27]

1 minute ago, Juniper said:

Linda - we are thinking in exactly the same way as you!  
We would have nowhere to return to in the UK during the term of a 600 so it really has to be the 870 but as you say - for 3 or 5 years? 
Then I worry that they may be a rush of applicants for the 870 who are obviously all in the same position as ourselves.  Am I right in thinking there is quite a low annual limit on the number of 870’s granted? 

 

There’s an allowance of 15,000 per year I believe ! 

[LindaH27]

I know there’s been a lot of petitions recently but to my mind one of the biggest things that is unfair is that 804, 884 and 864 are allowed to wait onshore whilst their visa is being processed whereas 103, 173  and 143 have to wait offshore. I do know that 804, 884 and 864 are for aged parents over pension age but for some of us, although of an age to apply,  there were things that needed sorting and  winding up   before we could leave more or less permanently to put in the onshore application and had no choice but to apply for 143 in order to get the application in ASAP. 
 

Either extend the same right to 143 applicants of pension age or make it all offshore. I know this will be controversial but it’s the same queue with the same wait  time but with an added advantage for some. 

[Juniper]

32 minutes ago, LindaH27 said:

There’s an allowance of 15,000 per year I believe ! 

Does anyone have an idea how long an 870 application takes?

It obviously wouldn’t be granted until the Australian Borders open, but I wondered about applying in advance?

[BargeUK]

4 minutes ago, Juniper said:

Does anyone have an idea how long an 870 application takes?

It obviously wouldn’t be granted until the Australian Borders open, but I wondered about applying in advance?

I seem to remember that the sponsor has to be approved first then the application has to be lodged within 6 months of that but I don't know for sure. Maybe once the borders open it won't be too long before you are contacted anyway - fingers crossed!

Edited November 11, 2020 by BargeUK
Addition

[MajHam]

Hi All. Very excited to say got 2nd VAC request today. Things definitely seeming to be moving a bit at last.

[chintu]

Congratulations MajHam,

I have a query, I have received a notification in email for a valid application for 143.

1. Is there anything else I should be doing before Aos or 2nd VAC is requested?

2. Is anyone aware if the income requirements for Aos have changed?

 

Thank you in advance if anyone is aware of the above.

[LindaH27]

15 minutes ago, chintu said:

Congratulations MajHam,

I have a query, I have received a notification in email for a valid application for 143.

1. Is there anything else I should be doing before Aos or 2nd VAC is requested?

2. Is anyone aware if the income requirements for Aos have changed?

 

Thank you in advance if anyone is aware of the above

Nothing you can do until all documents are requested as some are time limited and up to now AOS income requirement is the same. 

Applications after 1 June 2018 are being  looked at and then, if valid,  will then be placed in a queue and will be given a queue date. This is likely to be later than the actual date of lodgement, unlike those who applied before 1 June 2018, whose queue date is date of lodgement. 
 

Best to prepare for a very long  wait unfortunately

[ramot]

10 minutes ago, LindaH27 said:

I know there’s been a lot of petitions recently but to my mind one of the biggest things that is unfair is that 804, 884 and 864 are allowed to wait onshore whilst their visa is being processed whereas 103, 173  and 143 have to wait offshore. I do know that 804, 884 and 864 are for aged parents over pension age but for some of us, although of an age to apply,  there were things that needed sorting and  winding up   before we could leave more or less permanently to put in the onshore application and had no choice but to apply for 143 in order to get the application in ASAP. 
 

Either extend the same right to 143 applicants of pension age or make it all offshore. I know this will be controversial but it’s the same queue with the same wait  time but with an added advantage for some. 

Just a gentle reminder that some 864 visa applicants including me and others that I know, were already living here for many years on the 410 visa, before our children moved here after us,, which is why we could then apply onshore for the 864 visa. So are you suggesting we should have given up our established lives and move back to the UK to apply for the 143 visa.

Life and immigration is unfair, when Chris Evans was immigration minister, he changed the rules retrospectively, and immediately. our son had done everything right, front loaded his onshore visa which normally have been almost instantly granted, instead he had to wait another 31/2 years on a vulnerable bridging visa, before being one of the few lucky ones who got PR, thousands were just told to leave the country in 28days. 

At the present time the immigration rules allow onshore parent visa applications, The sad fact is that the waiting time for  visa grant has blown out of all proportion due to the enormous number of parent visa applicants, but immigration has reduced the number of visa grants which makes the situation very unfair.

I think it’s disgraceful that the waiting times shown on official web sites bare no relation to the reality. I don’t know if they have been updated yet, but it seems morally wrong that you  apply for a visa on the understanding that the waiting time for the 864 visa to grant will be approximately 1 year, is now 31/2 years and counting, I am completely sympathetic to the sheer frustration felt by so many.

 

[MajHam]

48 minutes ago, chintu said:

Congratulations MajHam,

I have a query, I have received a notification in email for a valid application for 143.

1. Is there anything else I should be doing before Aos or 2nd VAC is requested?

2. Is anyone aware if the income requirements for Aos have changed?

 

Thank you in advance if anyone is aware of the above.

Hi. Thank you.  In our case there was no queuing so we didn’t hear anything until case officer asked for further documents which was January this year. I’m not sure what happens within the queuing process which I understand has been introduced for applications from some time in 2018 (I think). I’m sure there are others on the forum who can advise on this point. Also not sure if there have been recent changes with AOS. Someone will know though! 

[LindaH27]

32 minutes ago, ramot said:

Just a gentle reminder that some 864 visa applicants including me and others that I know, were already living here for many years on the 410 visa, before our children moved here after us,, which is why we could then apply onshore for the 864 visa. So are you suggesting we should have given up our established lives and move back to the UK to apply for the 143 visa.

Life and immigration is unfair, when Chris Evans was immigration minister, he changed the rules retrospectively, and immediately. our son had done everything right, front loaded his onshore visa which normally have been almost instantly granted, instead he had to wait another 31/2 years on a vulnerable bridging visa, before being one of the few lucky ones who got PR, thousands were just told to leave the country in 28days. 

At the present time the immigration rules allow onshore parent visa applications, The sad fact is that the waiting time for  visa grant has blown out of all proportion due to the enormous number of parent visa applicants, but immigration has reduced the number of visa grants which makes the situation very unfair.

I think it’s disgraceful that the waiting times shown on official web sites bare no relation to the reality. I don’t know if they have been updated yet, but it seems morally wrong that you  apply for a visa on the understanding that the waiting time for the 864 visa to grant will be approximately 1 year, is now 31/2 years and counting, I am completely sympathetic to the sheer frustration felt by so many.

 

Also a gentle reminder that your cases are very different and that I do understand the situation caused by 405/410 changes and they have been rightly catered for by immigration either by allowing them to apply for 864 or more recently for accelerated 143 to avoid having to disrupt their established lives in Australia. 

These numbers  were/are  relatively small in relation to the huge number  of applications for 864 and 143 in the last few years from people with no prior residence or work ties to Australia and this is where there should be equality. 
 

We all have a different opinion depending on our circumstances - I was hoping  more along the lines of allowing 143 aged parents the same privilege waiting onshore. Certainly I wouldn’t expect any changes to be retrospective for current 804/864 applicants - there’s no way Australia would authorise a mass exodus!
 

But certainly I think they will be looking at the medical and care costs of this in the future given the dire straits of the  economy after Covid. 

[chintu]

32 minutes ago, MajHam said:

Hi. Thank you.  In our case there was no queuing so we didn’t hear anything until case officer asked for further documents which was January this year. I’m not sure what happens within the queuing process which I understand has been introduced for applications from some time in 2018 (I think). I’m sure there are others on the forum who can advise on this point. Also not sure if there have been recent changes with AOS. Someone will know though! 

Thanks for the advise. Yah I applied April 2019 and haven't heard anything yet.

[ramot]

9 hours ago, LindaH27 said:

Also a gentle reminder that your cases are very different and that I do understand the situation caused by 405/410 changes and they have been rightly catered for by immigration either by allowing them to apply for 864 or more recently for accelerated 143 to avoid having to disrupt their established lives in Australia. 

These numbers  were/are  relatively small in relation to the huge number  of applications for 864 and 143 in the last few years from people with no prior residence or work ties to Australia and this is where there should be equality. 
 

We all have a different opinion depending on our circumstances - I was hoping  more along the lines of allowing 143 aged parents the same privilege waiting onshore. Certainly I wouldn’t expect any changes to be retrospective for current 804/864 applicants - there’s no way Australia would authorise a mass exodus!
 

But certainly I think they will be looking at the medical and care costs of this in the future given the dire straits of the  economy after Covid. 

Let me clarify we applied for the 864 parent visa well before the unexpected changes in our favour, as in our case like others we were finally in the position of having the balance of family here so so we were  in exactly the same position as every other 864  Parent visa applicant when we applied, and would have still been in a long queue, we had no idea when we applied that our circumstances would change, so we would have been daft not to take advantage of the unexpected change.i think everyone waiting for a visa would do the same if they were given the chance. I do have sympathy for everyone waiting.

Any chance of 143 visa applicants even being considered to be allowed onshore during the present covid restrictions is not going to happen, it’s impossible to for anyone who isn’t a PR to come here, and I think it’s totally unrealistic to think immigration even care about it. If there is already concern about the cost of onshore parent applicants to the country, they are hardly likely to ever admit up to another 60,000!! 

 

Edited November 11, 2020 by ramot

[LindaH27]

6 hours ago, ramot said:

Let me clarify we applied for the 864 parent visa well before the unexpected changes in our favour, as in our case like others we were finally in the position of having the balance of family here so so we were  in exactly the same position as every other 864  Parent visa applicant when we applied, and would have still been in a long queue, we had no idea when we applied that our circumstances would change, so we would have been daft not to take advantage of the unexpected change.i think everyone waiting for a visa would do the same if they were given the chance. I do have sympathy for everyone waiting.

Any chance of 143 visa applicants even being considered to be allowed onshore during the present covid restrictions is not going to happen, it’s impossible to for anyone who isn’t a PR to come here, and I think it’s totally unrealistic to think immigration even care about it. If there is already concern about the cost of onshore parent applicants to the country, they are hardly likely to ever admit up to another 60,000!! 

 

My post quite clearly stated that I was asking for 143 applicants of pension age only to be allowed onshore ie those who fit the same  criteria for 864  - not all 60000 applicants!! .  

Actually what is likely to happen is that when the borders do eventually open those older 143  applicants including myself, , who don’t have as much time left to spend with their families as younger applicants,  will probably just arrive and change their 143 for 864. Yes they would start the wait afresh . But they would be with their families so why not take advantage of the loophole others have. 

Edited November 12, 2020 by LindaH27

[ramot]

4 minutes ago, LindaH27 said:

My post quite clearly stated that I was asking for 143 applicants of pension age only to be allowed onshore ie those who fit the same  criteria for 864  - not all 60000 applicants!! .  

Actually what is likely to happen is that when the borders do eventually open those older 143  applicants including myself, , who don’t have as much time left to spend with their families as younger applicants,  will probably just arrive and change their 143 for 864. Yes they would start the wait afresh . But they would be with their families so why not take advantage of the loophole others have. 

Sounds like a plan, hope everything works out for you. It’s not easy having family as in our case in different countries, and  our only grandchildren are in UK, so it will be a while before we can see them again, and age is against us.

[Alan Collett]

Be cautious about setting out plans for applying onshore on a public forum which the Department of Home Affairs is understood to monitor.

It wouldn't surprise me if comments of this nature colour the Department's thinking and plans when considering strategies for the migration program.

Best regards.

[LindaH27]

1 hour ago, Alan Collett said:

Be cautious about setting out plans for applying onshore on a public forum which the Department of Home Affairs is understood to monitor.

It wouldn't surprise me if comments of this nature colour the Department's thinking and plans when considering strategies for the migration program.

Best regards.

Thanks Alan - yes Im aware of this. Put it down to frustration with the wait times!! . I’m actually more likely to apply for 870 as I would prefer to have PR sooner rather than later if I changed visas,  having already waited nearly 3.5 years. . It’s also frustrating that there has been a difference between the 804/864  and the offshore visas when they fit the same criteria - and it that gets looked at perhaps there will be some equality in future? 
 

You posted a while ago that you were asking for some more statistics and to “watch this space”. Have there been any further developments on this ? 

[Alan Collett]

1 minute ago, LindaH27 said:

<snip>
 

You posted a while ago that you were asking for some more statistics and to “watch this space”. Have there been any further developments on this ? 

Nothing yet ... I await info (with bated breath!).

Best regards.

[Kathss56]

 2ND VAC REQUEST!!  Feels like a lifetime ago.....hmmm it was!! 
still won’t be valid for me until I can fly out of Oz but at least it’s there

[Aaron88]

1 hour ago, Kathss56 said:

 2ND VAC REQUEST!!  Feels like a lifetime ago.....hmmm it was!! 
still won’t be valid for me until I can fly out of Oz but at least it’s there

Gratz, you made it. Hopefully more good news tomorrow and coming weeks.