The Brand New PIO Parents Visa thread

[palaceboy1]

6 hours ago, Ray and Geri said:

Yep got to agree with that.... right from the beginning everyone on a 143 agreed to pay more for a quicker visa.....we all had the choice.....The people who opted for a cheaper but longer wait are now slotting themselves ( or rather the people who make the rules are ) into our line and knocking us back.... Seems we are not now getting the service we contracted for.

Nope got to disagree with that...We did not all have the choice some people are not as wealthy as others but absent parents/grandparents all the same. When entering the 103 queue the wait was about 5-7 years it is now estimated at 25 to 30 years. A wait is a wait whatever queue your on

[Ray and Geri]

15 hours ago, palaceboy1 said:

Nope got to disagree with that...We did not all have the choice some people are not as wealthy as others but absent parents/grandparents all the same. When entering the 103 queue the wait was about 5-7 years it is now estimated at 25 to 30 years. A wait is a wait whatever queue your on

I agree, as you say as parents/grandparents we all want to get out to Oz ASAP and be with our children/grandchildren.... but I wonder where did the applicants who " are not as wealthy as others" and had to go with the 103 visa get the extra thousands of pounds from to switch to the 143 visa queue ? 

 

Edited March 31, 2018 by Ray and Geri
re worded

[SusieRoo]

I don't think people switching from a 103 to 143 makes too much difference to the length of the queue. What I don't understand is why you can't switch from a 173 to a 143 without going to the back of the queue.

This thread concentrates mainly on 143 visa subjects and we don't hear enough about non-cpvs. I can't imagine what it is like to be waiting in a 25/30 year queue in fact I would be lucky to live that long.

The cost of a cpv feels expensive to me now, but really it's very, very good value when you stop and think what you are getting. I love the UK, but I do believe the young ones have a better life growing up in OZ, and being a part of a multi generation family is worth more that anything else I can think of.

Talking of visa costs, the next federal budget is presented this month. Will we see a price hike? Personally I think not this year, but it is only a matter of time until the cost of a cpv moves closer to $300k. Which is the amount we reportedly cost the Aussie taxpayer.

I guess if our visas were now $300k each then we would also have to try our luck in the 30 year queue.

Edited April 1, 2018 by SusieRoo

[LindaH27]

I can’t answer for any increase in 2nd vac charge but last year I think the government arranged for all first vac charges to go up in future in line with inflation. 

I still can’t understand why they think it’s only migrant parents who cost that much! Surely even born and bred Aussies would have the same illnesses and conditions and therefore potentially the same costs in later life? As I said in an earlier post I was told the visa charge reflects what the average Australian citizen on an average salary would pay to Medicare over a working life and if we paid Australian tax on pension income we would also still be paying the Medicare levy. So in effect  we all pay the same. Well that’s for the 143 visa charge. I don't know what the 103  visa charges are. 

Going off track for a moment - I also think we need to pay something extra  into NHS in UK. I have no objection to this despite  having already paid taxes all my working life. I always thought part of the tax paid went to NHS but obviously as in Australia it supports everybody working or not. In fact imagine if we all had our own “pot” we paid  into which was transferable on emigration from UK !! Much easier!! I believe something like this happens in New Zealand - apart from the transferable bit! 

Edited April 1, 2018 by LindaH27

[Marisawright]

14 minutes ago, LindaH27 said:

I still can’t understand why they think it’s only migrant parents who cost that much! Surely even born and bred Aussies would have the same illnesses and conditions and therefore potentially the same costs in later life? 

Well yes, exactly - but as you point out yourself, a born and bred Aussie will have paid taxes and the Medicare levy all their working life, so that's why they require migrant parents to contribute an equivalent sum.

I was thinking about the earlier discussion and you have a point, to be fair they should consider the whole family unit and their costs to the country (not having to pay for the son's or daughter's education, for instance), but that would make the whole process even more convoluted, and I wonder if it would be practical.

As for paying extra into the NHS - do you mean the NHS or NI?

[Tulip1]

On 31/03/2018 at 01:58, palaceboy1 said:

Nope got to disagree with that...We did not all have the choice some people are not as wealthy as others but absent parents/grandparents all the same. When entering the 103 queue the wait was about 5-7 years it is now estimated at 25 to 30 years. A wait is a wait whatever queue your on

The 5-7 year wait must have been along time ago. I looked at that option nearly 10 years ago and decided not to bother as the wait was about 20 years even then. 

[LindaH27]

Please don’t misunderstand me - I fully understand the reasons why and accept that I will pay the second visa charge and have no objection to this. I knew, as we all did from the start,  that we would have to pay but we were prepared to pay this as we thought that it would be a quicker way of rejoining our family. 

My own daughter emigrated twelve years ago having been to university in UK and worked for a while too before emigrating. She has worked hard in Australia  and after being headhunted now has a really  prestigious job. Her education and training was paid for in UK which has had very little in return from her! She (and her partner) obviously now pay a lot in tax and also thereby a lot into the Medicare levy. She is also very keen to support me as I get older although I mean in family support rather than in finances as I will be supporting myself. 

I don’t know , however, as you say how they could take all that into account?  I agree it would be very complex  

Obviously we all have personal reasons to want to go to Australia too. I am a widow with no family round me so being over there would have benefits for all of us. I would never ask her to come home, it’s her life and I think the opportunities for my grandchildren mean a much better lifestyle.

I did mean NHS not national insurance.  Yes the government are talking about a similar idea to Medicare in which people would pay an extra percent (to be determined ) in income tax (not NI) which would be ringfenced for the NHS. Providing free NHS care at point of use to 66 million people in UK  is proving a very heavy burden on taxes received. One of the more common reasons cited for Brexit is that not having to pay so much into the EU means more money for NHS.(but please don’t let’s start a pro and anti brexit debate - I’m simply repeating the facts as stated by the government ! ) 

I do feel that every country needs to have a supported paid health system - it’s a fact that we are all living longer. 

[Marisawright]

9 hours ago, LindaH27 said:

Obviously we all have personal reasons to want to go to Australia too. I am a widow with no family round me so being over there would have benefits for all of us. I would never ask her to come home, it’s her life and I think the opportunities for my grandchildren mean a much better lifestyle.

I did mean NHS not national insurance.  Yes the government are talking about a similar idea to Medicare in which people would pay an extra percent (to be determined ) in income tax (not NI) which would be ringfenced for the NHS. Providing free NHS care at point of use to 66 million people in UK  is proving a very heavy burden on taxes received. One of the more common reasons cited for Brexit is that not having to pay so much into the EU means more money for NHS.(but please don’t let’s start a pro and anti brexit debate - I’m simply repeating the facts as stated by the government ! ) 

I do feel that every country needs to have a supported paid health system - it’s a fact that we are all living longer. 

And I hope you don't misunderstand me - I don't begrudge any parent wanting to come to Australia.  This debate started because someone made a hopeful post about the Australian government reducing the cost one day - and I was only explaining why I think there's a snowball's chance in hell of that happening.

I agree with you, I think having to pay a levy makes people more aware, but I'm not sure what the right level should be.  Should it be high enough to actually pay for the service?  I wonder if a lower levy would just make people feel even more entitled.   For instance, my cousin (in the UK) was furious when the pension age went up and she had to wait another year to qualify for the pension.  Her argument was, "I paid my NI contributions all my working life, I paid for that pension!".    The thing is, if you work out her 30 years' worth of NI contributions and then work out how much she'll get in pension over the 20 years she may live, it falls far short - even taking into account compound interest.  She didn't pay for that pension, she paid for a tiny part of it.  The rest has to come out of taxes, and taxes, as you point out, have to pay for the NHS, infrastructure, etc etc.

[Ferrets]

On 3/29/2018 at 03:49, Alan Collett said:

For background, a Ministerial Direction requires the Department to treat the lodgment date of the 103 visa application as the lodgment date of a 143 application when the 103 is withdrawn in favour of a 143.

Ditto for 804s and 864s.

Best regards.

Hi Alan,

For parents who are currently not able to commit to a CPV, does applying for a 103 represent an option to serve time on the queue in case of future commitment?

I appreciate that rules change and visas can be scrapped but on the face of it seems an option.

Many thanks!

[Fisher1]

3 hours ago, Ferrets said:

Hi Alan,

For parents who are currently not able to commit to a CPV, does applying for a 103 represent an option to serve time on the queue in case of future commitment?

I appreciate that rules change and visas can be scrapped but on the face of it seems an option.

Many thanks!

We applied for a 103 visa back in 2013 because we wanted to get our names on some sort of waiting list but were looking after my mum and couldn't envisage a time line for that. When our grandson was born in 2015, it coincided with a downturn in my mum's health so we decided to switch to the 143 visa. We finally applied for a 143 early in 2016 and the visa was granted that April, because they counted the two plus years we had already been waiting in the 103 queue.    Someone said something earlier about 103 visa applicants 'slotting themselves into the 143 queue' - maybe that is the case, but don't forget that if you switch queues you have to pay the first vac all over again.   As to where people get the money to switch ... well I know of some people who have sold their houses to raise the fee and then bought smaller here, or just rented.  

 

[palaceboy1]

18 hours ago, Tulip1 said:

The 5-7 year wait must have been along time ago. I looked at that option nearly 10 years ago and decided not to bother as the wait was about 20 years even then. 

As they are currently processing 2010 its 7/8 years but because of capping and price rises more people have applied in the last few years. For example our date is 24/8/2015 and on this date we were 30010 in the queue we are now 24200 .Between 01/05/2014 (15180 ) and 24/8/2015 ( 24200 ) that,s 9020 applicants in just over a year @ 1500 grants a year that,s 6 years on the queue wait in just a short period.

Most years there have been 2/ 3 thousand  except for 2010/11( 5700) and 2014/15 (9000)  so the actual wait has never been more than 7/8 years . 

[Ferrets]

30 minutes ago, Fisher1 said:

We applied for a 103 visa back in 2013 because we wanted to get our names on some sort of waiting list but were looking after my mum and couldn't envisage a time line for that. When our grandson was born in 2015, it coincided with a downturn in my mum's health so we decided to switch to the 143 visa. We finally applied for a 143 early in 2016 and the visa was granted that April, because they counted the two plus years we had already been waiting in the 103 queue.    Someone said something earlier about 103 visa applicants 'slotting themselves into the 143 queue' - maybe that is the case, but don't forget that if you switch queues you have to pay the first vac all over again.   As to where people get the money to switch ... well I know of some people who have sold their houses to raise the fee and then bought smaller here, or just rented.  

 

A good call on the 1st VAC fee, had assumed it was minimal for 103 but realise that is about AUD $4k 

[gafuk]

Just now, SusieRoo said:

I don't think people switching from a 103 to 143 makes too much difference to the length of the queue. What I don't understand is why you can't switch from a 173 to a 143 without going to the back of the queue.

This thread concentrates mainly on 143 visa subjects and we don't hear enough about non-cpvs. I can't imagine what it is like to be waiting in a 25/30 year queue in fact I would be lucky to live that long.

The cost of a cpv feels expensive to me now, but really it's very, very good value when you stop and think what you are getting. I love the UK, but I do believe the young ones have a better life growing up in OZ, and being a part of a multi generation family is worth more that anything else I can think of.

Talking of visa costs, the next federal budget is presented this month. Will we see a price hike? Personally I think not this year, but it is only a matter of time until the cost of a cpv moves closer to $300k. Which is the amount we reportedly cost the Aussie taxpayer.

I guess if our visas were now $300k each then we would also have to try our luck in the 30 year queue.

 The Visa cost our significant but I am grateful that we can ( just about) afford the fees and get somewhere to live in OZ. We can hopefully enjoy some great everyday experiences with our Kids and grandkids in our last x years. I am sure there are thousands of people who have no choice but to join the 25+ years queue. Its a fair charge  all in all , we can't expect Australia to be as Liberal with the taxpayers contributions as the UK is. How many would vote for a similar system to be introduced here in the UK ?. 

[SusieRoo]

Looking at the New Zealand parent visa, they use a system where you have to have a guaranteed income for life (pension) and a lump sum. I guess this takes a lot of the burden off the NZ taxpayer. And this is what most UK parents are bringing to Australia anyway, so it's a pity they too don't have a system like this. I would be good to have someway to show we wouldn't just move to Australia and then freeload on the state.

Also there is a requirement for the NZ parent visa to speak English, which is no problem coming form the UK, but I do think this is so important relocating to any new country. Allowing immigrants to integrate properly and play a full roll in their new society. We have a few Eastern Europeans working for us here in the UK and it is interesting to see how well they fit in to the local community as language skills improve.     

[LindaH27]

I suppose there could be a way. It would mean yet another form but what’s another form with all the others ! When you are asked for documents there could be another form where you would list all the details of pensions/banks/building society / investment platforms/ annual tax summary etc  showing exactly what you have. There would then be proof of your self sufficiency and you could also show proof of having Australian private medical insurance too if you had it. Obviously it would be a pain to complete!

There is a question  on the 143 visa application form which does ask how much you are bringing into Australia but it doesn’t ask for proof. Perhaps if it did that would also show self sufficiency. 

Unfortunately none of us  - either migrants or Australian citizens - knows whether we will need extensive care in later life so some of us won’t be expensive to care for and some will but I’m willing to bet that no one will have paid enough contributions to fully fund that expensive care! 

That’s why in UK social care is very much on the radar. If you go into care You will pay until you have very little left - and that includes selling your house! I don’t know what happens  in Australia but suspect it’s similar both there and in other countries facing the “ democratic time bomb” of rapidly aging populations. I’m actually surprised nothing much has been done yet as this trend was noticed back in the 1980s!!

Anyway it’s quite ironic that those parents migrating to Australia will have paid into the UK system all their working lives but if they leave,  all their contributions towards future care will lost! Yes they will have pensions but some of what they have paid was for NHS and other health services.  

Edited April 2, 2018 by LindaH27

[Ray and Geri]

18 hours ago, LindaH27 said:

I suppose there could be a way. It would mean yet another form but what’s another form with all the others ! When you are asked for documents there could be another form where you would list all the details of pensions/banks/building society / investment platforms/ annual tax summary etc  showing exactly what you have. There would then be proof of your self sufficiency and you could also show proof of having Australian private medical insurance too if you had it. Obviously it would be a pain to complete!

There is a question  on the 143 visa application form which does ask how much you are bringing into Australia but it doesn’t ask for proof. Perhaps if it did that would also show self sufficiency. 

Unfortunately none of us  - either migrants or Australian citizens - knows whether we will need extensive care in later life so some of us won’t be expensive to care for and some will but I’m willing to bet that no one will have paid enough contributions to fully fund that expensive care! 

That’s why in UK social care is very much on the radar. If you go into care You will pay until you have very little left - and that includes selling your house! I don’t know what happens  in Australia but suspect it’s similar both there and in other countries facing the “ democratic time bomb” of rapidly aging populations. I’m actually surprised nothing much has been done yet as this trend was noticed back in the 1980s!!

Anyway it’s quite ironic that those parents migrating to Australia will have paid into the UK system all their working lives but if they leave,  all their contributions towards future care will lost! Yes they will have pensions but some of what they have paid was for NHS and other health services.  

And don't forget your state pension will be frozen as well, even though you contributed to it all your working life.... We are all giving up an awful lot of security in our later life to be with our families in Oz....... but it will all be worth it to watch our grand kids growing up. 

[Brett31]

Is any1 else also not getting the auto reply?

[Fisher1]

On ‎2‎/‎04‎/‎2018 at 17:26, palaceboy1 said:

As they are currently processing 2010 its 7/8 years but because of capping and price rises more people have applied in the last few years. For example our date is 24/8/2015 and on this date we were 30010 in the queue we are now 24200 .Between 01/05/2014 (15180 ) and 24/8/2015 ( 24200 ) that,s 9020 applicants in just over a year @ 1500 grants a year that,s 6 years on the queue wait in just a short period.

Most years there have been 2/ 3 thousand  except for 2010/11( 5700) and 2014/15 (9000)  so the actual wait has never been more than 7/8 years . 

When we were in the 103 queue I used to check the electronic queue calculator all the time (despite being in no position to make the move at that time).  During that period I noticed that the number of places we moved up per year were greater than the number of visas issued - presumably because people switched to another queue, or dropped out for whatever reason. This gap between visas issued and places moved up got bigger over time.   I tried using the electronic calculator and entering a queue date that was one year earlier than my actual date, then two years, then three and so on, to see how the figures stacked up.  Eight years seemed the likely wait at that time, yet when our 103 application was acknowledged we were warned that it could take twenty years.  So it all depends on the drop out rate.

The big unknown is the health check. I think people really get the wind up about the possibility of waiting years and then failing the health check - I know we did - and this probably induces some applicants to move heaven and earth to find the money for a 143 application.  

 

[Geoffandgill]

Just heard from our daughter who is on holiday in Queensland, that she has had her Centrelink phone call interview. 6 weeks roughly from AoS application, not bad going! 

Geoff & Gill

[MikenC]

Great news. We heard from our son yesterday to say he had received the Centrelink letter as well, so another step forward for us as well. We may even get inside the 39 month projected process time if we're lucky

[TinaH]

Centerlink is doing a great job now. Bravo!!!

[Pertenhall]

46 minutes ago, TinaH said:

Centerlink is doing a great job now. Bravo!!!

Not for us yet!!

[Pertenhall]

10 hours ago, Fisher1 said:

When we were in the 103 queue I used to check the electronic queue calculator all the time (despite being in no position to make the move at that time).  During that period I noticed that the number of places we moved up per year were greater than the number of visas issued - presumably because people switched to another queue, or dropped out for whatever reason. This gap between visas issued and places moved up got bigger over time.   I tried using the electronic calculator and entering a queue date that was one year earlier than my actual date, then two years, then three and so on, to see how the figures stacked up.  Eight years seemed the likely wait at that time, yet when our 103 application was acknowledged we were warned that it could take twenty years.  So it all depends on the drop out rate.

The big unknown is the health check. I think people really get the wind up about the possibility of waiting years and then failing the health check - I know we did - and this probably induces some applicants to move heaven and earth to find the money for a 143 application.  

 

Certainly agree with you about the worry over health checks.  Thank goodness we passed ours.  Even though we feel fit and healthy you just never know what it could have thrown up.  

[TinaH]

13 minutes ago, Pertenhall said:

Not for us yet!!

Maybe you should give them a call? No movement for 143 since 13th March. 

[TinaH]

14 minutes ago, Pertenhall said:

Not for us yet!!

Btw, have you heard anything from DIBP? Your lodgement date was 12/3/15.