Complaint to Ombudsman

[Jeffster]

Just got a call from the Ombudsmans office. The man who spoke to me started by trying to pass the buck and saying the issues were not under the jurisdiction of the Ombudsman and I should contact the “Minister of Immigration, and his name is Chris Evans…” and that is when I told him to stop talking and gave him a verbal diatribe on the fact that I and the other complainants are perfectly well aware of who the Minister is and that I would be very surprised if the Minister didn’t know by now that there are serious issues since hundreds, if not thousands, of people and organisations have told him and a Senate Inquiry had been setup to investigate a Bill he was trying to introduce. I went on to say we were not going to accept being fobbed off or hoisted onto someone else, canned responses or sending our problems to another Department etc. and that the Ombudsman must address the issues because things have got way out of hand.

There was a short silence.

The rest of the conversation went a little better.

We established that the Ombudsman could only deal with administrative issues within DIAC and not legislation (Bills / Acts of Parliament). So from the complaint the following are out of the Ombudsman jurisdiction:

· VAC fees – although I might disagree with this as I believe the relevant Bill states a charge can be raised but not the actual amounts (which is what we are disputing)

· Policies / policy changes

The Ombudsman can deal with the following:

· Delays in the time taken to process an application

· Refusal of DIAC to refund a VAC

· Any other administrative functions performed by DIAC

The Ombudsman can only deal with a complaint AFTER the issue has been raised with DIAC Global Feedback Unit (GFU). Fortunately, MARA saw this coming and forwarded the complaint to the GFU.

The GFU are due to respond to our complaint by tomorrow so if we don’t like what they tell us (which we probably won’t) we can refer back to the Ombudsman (which we will).

It looks like we can do a few things from here:

A) Anyone wanting to withdraw an application and get a refund;

i.) Contact GFU and demand a refund because the expected waiting time was 3-6 months and it has taken 12, 18, 24 etc. months.

ii.) GFU will likely respond with a no

iii.) Take complaint and copy of GFU response to Ombudsman

Eventually, when enough people demand refunds the Ombudsman and / or GFU will get so annoyed that policy will change.

B) Anyone wanting to complain about delays in processing

i.) Contact GFU, complain about delay

ii.) Get standard response from GFU

iii.) Take complaint and copy of GFU response to Ombudsman

 

Again, the Ombudsman will get annoyed and start telling DIAC to get its act together.

As far as joint complaints go, we can do these but each person has to make a written and signed declaration which have to be mailed and / or faxed.

I have a case number that can be referred to which I can post here or PM me if you want it.

From now I will wait on the GFU response and see what they say (like we don’t already know) Also, if there are any lawyers / agents who know about what constitutes legislation and what constitutes rules & regulations in the case of VAC and whether it falls under the jurisdiction of the Ombudsman to investigate or someone else (Auditor General?), I think this is a grey area that needs clarification and any advice is appreciated. I’m also expecting a call from Senator Xenaphon’s office as he promised he would contact me once the outcome of the election was known.

In a nutshell I think this was the Ombudsmans office responding in the hope we will go away, so let’s totally disappoint them! Now we know exactly what has to be done.

DIAC GFU contact details: http://www.immi.gov.au/contacts/forms/services/

Ombudsman contact details: http://www.ombudsman.gov.au/pages/making-a-complaint/

Can we pin this topic for a while as it would be useful for people to know the details?

[Guest Mongobear]

Great stuff Jeffster and again, many thanks for your efforts !!!

[Kokki]

Just got a call from the Ombudsmans office. The man who spoke to me started by trying to pass the buck and saying the issues were not under the jurisdiction of the Ombudsman and I should contact the “Minister of Immigration, and his name is Chris Evans…”

 

B) Anyone wanting to complain about delays in processing

i.) Contact GFU, complain about delay

ii.) Get standard response from GFU

iii.) Take complaint and copy of GFU response to Ombudsman

 

I have a case number that can be referred to which I can post here or PM me if you want it.

 

Hi Jeffster,

 

Thanks a lot for the detail of your instructions and explanation. I speak on behalf of everone with great appreciation. I would like to let you know that you can count me in on anything in an attempt to submit any form or petitions.

I would like to let you know that around 2 months ago, I called an complained to the adelaide processing center and sent an email to the Ombudsman. I got a response from them with a case nb and I was asked to contact GFU, which I did. I got another case nb from them. The complaint was about my case not being processed and the time delay as I applied in May08. I got a letter from GFU (which, of course, I didn't like) saying that there is nothing anyone can do because of the processing priority which the minister has the right to exercise. That's where my journey ended.

Was I supposed to forward that to the ombudsman. The reply had a clear dead end that it discouraged me. Do you think I should reforward it back to ombudsman or do you think I should add it to a group complaint? Anything I could to help. Safety in numbers.

cheers again.

[mlsdq]

wow! you were able to let the ombudsman to issue info about this! BIG thanks! im keeping an eye still in this thread.

 

yes . please make this topic sticky?

[Guest stayer]

Jeffster,

 

thank you for doing this.

 

EVERYONE

 

Can you think of some ways to get attention of the media? I was wondering if anyone knows if one of the Independents may think our way and that may do the trick.

 

But the media would be better idea I think. Anyone with contacts in leading Oz media?

[Guest pippa1]

Hi Jeffster

 

Well done for not letting them pass the buck! I did contact GFU and ombudsman about priority processing back in Aug 09 and got usual reply from both. Ombudsman said they could not help me as they could not challenge Minister's decisions.

 

I have sent you PM and can send you copies of my responses if they will assist you in any way. I am more than happy to help, and just maybe you're right; if we shout loud enough someone may listen.

 

Here's hoping

 

Thanks for a top effort x

[Guest Manj]

Weldone Jeffster - good work mate. I will call the GFU and make a complaint.

 

I think we all should now start emailing the PM again.... about Labor's migration SCAM!!

 

__________________________________________

CAT (4), 885 applied 2008 AUG, ICT - Recent graduate NEC, IELTS 8.0, NAATI qualified, Currently employed as a ICT Project Officer

[Guest beersheer]

Dont exactly remember but someone here mentioned that he/she had some ways

to contact Channel 9 "A Current Affair", effectively!

That may help bringing out the much needed attention to this issue through media...

I'll go through all the posts and will try to find who he/she was...

[Guest Mongobear]

Well, I think it was Jeffster :biggrin:

[ramot]

Well done Jeffster. Will chase up my family member. All onshore 885/6 applicants will only stand a chance if they make enough noise. Have you read the transcripts of Peter Mares's programs from last Oct.? He was definitely on the ex students side. Good luck with Senator Xenathon, we will contact Barnaby Joyce again, he did appear sympathetic to the cause. Any one else in Qld please contact him as well please.

[Guest Manj]

Guys try writting to the Greens as well

 

Write a Letter to the Editor | Greens MPs

 

You could also email few editors from the papers throgh the link!

 

Hope this is not too much to ask for

_______________________________________________

CAT (4), 885 applied 2008 AUG, ICT - Recent graduate NEC, IELTS 8.0, NAATI qualified, Currently employed as a ICT Project Officer

[Guest Gollywobbler]

Just got a call from the Ombudsmans office. The man who spoke to me started by trying to pass the buck and saying the issues were not under the jurisdiction of the Ombudsman and I should contact the “Minister of Immigration, and his name is Chris Evans…” and that is when I told him to stop talking and gave him a verbal diatribe on the fact that I and the other complainants are perfectly well aware of who the Minister is and that I would be very surprised if the Minister didn’t know by now that there are serious issues since hundreds, if not thousands, of people and organisations have told him and a Senate Inquiry had been setup to investigate a Bill he was trying to introduce. I went on to say we were not going to accept being fobbed off or hoisted onto someone else, canned responses or sending our problems to another Department etc. and that the Ombudsman must address the issues because things have got way out of hand.

There was a short silence.

The rest of the conversation went a little better.

We established that the Ombudsman could only deal with administrative issues within DIAC and not legislation (Bills / Acts of Parliament). So from the complaint the following are out of the Ombudsman jurisdiction:

· VAC fees – although I might disagree with this as I believe the relevant Bill states a charge can be raised but not the actual amounts (which is what we are disputing)

· Policies / policy changes

The Ombudsman can deal with the following:

· Delays in the time taken to process an application

· Refusal of DIAC to refund a VAC

· Any other administrative functions performed by DIAC

The Ombudsman can only deal with a complaint AFTER the issue has been raised with DIAC Global Feedback Unit (GFU). Fortunately, MARA saw this coming and forwarded the complaint to the GFU.

The GFU are due to respond to our complaint by tomorrow so if we don’t like what they tell us (which we probably won’t) we can refer back to the Ombudsman (which we will).

It looks like we can do a few things from here:

A) Anyone wanting to withdraw an application and get a refund;

i.) Contact GFU and demand a refund because the expected waiting time was 3-6 months and it has taken 12, 18, 24 etc. months.

ii.) GFU will likely respond with a no

iii.) Take complaint and copy of GFU response to Ombudsman

Eventually, when enough people demand refunds the Ombudsman and / or GFU will get so annoyed that policy will change.

B) Anyone wanting to complain about delays in processing

i.) Contact GFU, complain about delay

ii.) Get standard response from GFU

iii.) Take complaint and copy of GFU response to Ombudsman

 

Again, the Ombudsman will get annoyed and start telling DIAC to get its act together.

As far as joint complaints go, we can do these but each person has to make a written and signed declaration which have to be mailed and / or faxed.

I have a case number that can be referred to which I can post here or PM me if you want it.

From now I will wait on the GFU response and see what they say (like we don’t already know) Also, if there are any lawyers / agents who know about what constitutes legislation and what constitutes rules & regulations in the case of VAC and whether it falls under the jurisdiction of the Ombudsman to investigate or someone else (Auditor General?), I think this is a grey area that needs clarification and any advice is appreciated. I’m also expecting a call from Senator Xenaphon’s office as he promised he would contact me once the outcome of the election was known.

In a nutshell I think this was the Ombudsmans office responding in the hope we will go away, so let’s totally disappoint them! Now we know exactly what has to be done.

DIAC GFU contact details: http://www.immi.gov.au/contacts/forms/services/

Ombudsman contact details: http://www.ombudsman.gov.au/pages/making-a-complaint/

Can we pin this topic for a while as it would be useful for people to know the details?

 

Hi Jeffster

 

I've copied your post above into a new thread in the "sticky" section. There is no point in making the whole of this thread sticky because at least half of the pages were devoted to the matter of how to frame the complaint etc. Your post above is the one that people now need to know about, so I want to make that post stand out and then re-direct people to this existing thread if they want to comment further.

 

I hope this makes sense. I've got computer woes at home at the moment and I'm trying to do this in the office instead, when I ought to be working on other things.

 

My machine at home is a laptop and I'm 99% sure that the transformer for it died yesterday evening, meaning that its battery will soon follow. I know what the Book of Words for the machine looks like and I even know where it is. I haven't the faintest idea how to ensure that I get a new transformer that is compatible with the machine so I suspect that it will take at least a week to sort the problem out with the contraption at home.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

[Guest Seb]

My machine at home is a laptop and I'm 99% sure that the transformer for it died yesterday evening, meaning that its battery will soon follow.

 

Gill,

 

When you get home, can you remove the battery from the laptop and try powering it with the a/c adapter only? If it does power on, then the battery is faulty, else it is the adapter. Also what's the make of the laptop?

 

Seb

[Guest umairghias]

Thanks Jeffster .

 

I thought Peter Mares was doing some work on this once the election is over?

 

Any ideas

?

 

 

Regards,

Umair

[Guest Gollywobbler]

Gill,

 

When you get home, can you remove the battery from the laptop and try powering it with the a/c adapter only? If it does power on, then the battery is faulty, else it is the adapter. Also what's the make of the laptop?

 

Seb

 

 

Hi Seb

 

I'm responding now because I might not be able to do so once I get home!

 

The laptop is a Toshiba which was new in 2004. The machine itself seems to be fine - the mains power for it suddenly went off but the machine worked normally from the battery last night.

 

The adapter is plugged into a 4-plug bar extension socket thing and the pilot light for the

4-way socket is on, so the mains power to the socket widget is OK. It could be that the plug for the adapter has fused - she says hopefully! I plan to change the plug in the fuse later but if that doesn't work then I suspect that the Toshiba adapter is caput.

 

I will try removing the battery, though, just in case the machine itself has developed a fault and the battery is somehow preventing the mains power from working.

 

I suspect that I am going to end up trying to figure out what the model number is for the adapter and finding a new one via the Toshiba website or something. I've never bought any computer gadgets on line. I bought the laptop from a friend in 2008. He had had it from new and had hardly ever used it so overwork is not the cause of death! He did tell me that the adapters for laptops do suddenly pack up without warning and that it is a pain when it happens because you can't then charge the battery either.

 

However he said it is quite easy to get a new adapter and in 2008 he said that they are about £40 GBP. (Methinks I might have to phone him, get him to order a new adapter on line and have it sent to me, then I will reimburse him for whatever the exercise has cost him.)

 

It only seems like a nightmare to me because unless you understand electronic gadgets (which I don't and I don't want to know anything about them) it becomes a prize pain when the computer won't work and sorting it out sounds like a huge task when it probably isn't, etc.

 

Many thanks for your help and I will try doing what you suggest. It might be next week before I can report back, though.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

[Guest Tanner]

Here's my two cents.

 

The problem with processing time is that DIAC will say it is largely a policy issue rather than administrative glitches. One obvious example is the planning levels and that is 100% policy. Once demand exceeds planning levels, the results are processing delays, for example the recent cut-back in Last Remaining Relative visas saw a massive stretch in their processing time. Recent people in pipeline of a lot of skilled visas, in a similar fashion, will also be deemed as a policy issue.

 

What might happen is that GFU (and/or Ombudsman, if they co-operate) will advise DIAC to merely revise their client service charter to reflect more realistic processing times; hence, better manage clients' expectations.

 

DIAC has many legal trump cards over would-be migrants. IMHO, the Ombudsman is not a direct solution to attack many of the certain problems. The best way is through local MPs/Senators and eventually through the Parliament & Senate. However, that IS also where the big problem lies. As this will be a non-priority for most electorates (Especially when the last election saw both major parties competing on whether who cuts migration the most! - in order to win a large chunk of votes), as the amount of voters (e.g. sponsors, family members) adversely affected by this issue will be relatively minuscule.

 

In short, existing Migration Act gives enormous power to DIAC and the minister over clients, and the only way to amend this is through parliament, yet the prospect of that happening seems currently slim.

 

However, in terms of VAC-refund, maybe I'm too optimistic? But I think there are ways we can legally hold DIAC to account on this.

 

I'm also thinking media drum up is actually not a bad idea. Remember when the media beat up the Indian student incidents? Big diplomatic and inter-governmental moves followed! Rupert Murdoch owned media are more than happy to report Labor bungle-ups, think Fox, Sky News and News Limited newspapers: The Australian, Daily Telegraph.

[User Name]

Peter Mares is probably the only media guy interested in this besides less than 0.1% of Australians know about him or listen to his radio segment. I personally never heard of him till I started visiting this forum. But something is better than nothing.

 

Australians know jack about GSM let alone worry about how 2231-79 IT grads got disadvantaged. Its would be even hard for any reporter to explain the fiasco properly. That is why no media is too keen on this.

 

We can try but I highly doubt anyone in media will be keen to take this on further.

[Guest Tanner]

Peter Mares is probably the only media guy interested in this besides less than 0.1% of Australians know about him or listen to his radio segment. I personally never heard of him till I started visiting this forum. But something is better than nothing.

 

Australians know jack about GSM let alone worry about how 2231-79 IT grads got disadvantaged. Its would be even hard for any reporter to explain the fiasco properly. That is why no media is too keen on this.

 

We can try but I highly doubt anyone in media will be keen to take this on further.

 

Hi user name, I myself admittedly didn't know who he is!

[Guest Tanner]

@User Name, you've got a point. Even the Group of 8 made it to the media, warning againts Australia losing billions of dollars in International Education Sector. Australians still didn't give a stuff. (And Keisha Ibrahim's mother got an unsurpassably bigger headline.)

"We will decide who comes to this country and the circumstances in which they come." seems to be too important for many.

[Guest beersheer]

Former Immigration Minister Chris Evans is now Minister for Jobs, Skills and Workplace Relations, while former Human Service Minister Chris Bowen now has the immigration portfolio.

 

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/democracy/news/article.cfm?c_id=171&objectid=10672949

 

What do you think?

The situation's better now or remains the same....??? (I mean in context with visa capping)

[Guest Manj]

Peter Mares is probably the only media guy interested in this besides less than 0.1% of Australians know about him or listen to his radio segment. I personally never heard of him till I started visiting this forum. But something is better than nothing.

 

Australians know jack about GSM let alone worry about how 2231-79 IT grads got disadvantaged. Its would be even hard for any reporter to explain the fiasco properly. That is why no media is too keen on this.

 

We can try but I highly doubt anyone in media will be keen to take this on further.

 

 

I got contacted by Peter Mares today. I left a voicemail message on his mailbox and he returned my call.

 

It was fantastic taliking to him, he was very understanding about the mess regarding the pre July 2010 ICT recent graduates (he was quite aware of the situation)

 

He will be questioning the new minister when he settles in.

______________________________________________

CAT (4), 885 applied 2008 AUG, ICT - Recent graduate NEC, IELTS 8.0, NAATI qualified, Currently employed as a ICT Project Officer

[Jeffster]

One, unforeseen, result of this whole exercise has been that a number of individuals have come out to say they have written to the Ombudsman / Minister / press etc. about the insurmountable problems we are facing. Of course, they have met with the same responses (generic replies, GFC’s fault etc.)

My whole take on this is that, outside the media, the ONLY person / group worth complaining to is the Ombudsman. The Minister and DIAC will not care for us unless their jobs are on the line and that will never happen as we cannot vote and are not large enough to make any difference anyway.

The Ombudsman has to deal with issues that are sent their way because they are legally obliged to. These issues, as recently discovered, must be administrative issues.

The complaints industry follows a certain unwritten procedure or mantra. When receiving a complaint they can either:

1. Deny the issue exists or the complainant is overreacting (rare)

2. Accept the issue exists but owing to unforeseen circumstances say it is not possible to resolve (occasional)

3. Try to pass on a complaint to another person / department by claiming it is out of scope for them to deal with (common)

The hope that the complainant will give up is the principal aim of all complaint departments, hence an initial “we can’t do anything” response. I reckon 90% of people DO give up after this initial response as they don’t want to or have the time or strength to carry on running round to different people / departments.

Our complaint fell into the third category. While some issues should be dealt with by the Ombudsman there are others in there that they cannot deal with. Unfortunately, it appears that when you give anyone the slightest excuse to fob you off they will do so. So if you have one letter with 6 points, 4 of which are within scope and 2 out of scope the entire thing will be rejected owing to the 2 out of scope issues.

Half the battle is knowing HOW to complain.

A change of tact is needed so I think the best idea is to not write joint letters complaining about everything but individual letters complaining about single issues (that are within the remit of the Ombudsman).

I will put together some text that can be included in the main body of each letter so it will actually just require people to fill in their details and a short intro and then send it to GFU (and then the Ombudsman).

At the moment I have the following admin issues that we can complain about:

1. Switching to ENS / SMS requires new application and fee – this DEFINITELY falls under admin because they are ignoring their own regulations (http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_reg/mr1994227/s2.08cb.html)

2. Visa fees – I’m working on proving this is an admin issue!

3. Delays – also an admin issue – they might blame GFC, high demand etc. but there have been no measures put in place for lengthy times on BV’s (personally, I think since they didn’t deliver in time we shouldn’t have to pay)

4. Lack of information for applicants – again definitely admin; almost every other nation offers a better tracking system than DIAC’s current miserable excuse and charge much less

I might be able to tie refunds into number 3, maybe…

Any comments, suggestions welcome. I will start posting “text bites” for each issue as I write them. These things have to be as watertight as possible so that the Ombudsman cannot come back and say it is out of their remit. Remember they are legally obliged to deal with complaints so they cannot fob off legitimate issues. Enough complaints about DIAC will end up in the right hands eventually but they have to get past the first hurdle to start with.

[Jules37]

One, unforeseen, result of this whole exercise has been that a number of individuals have come out to say they have written to the Ombudsman / Minister / press etc. about the insurmountable problems we are facing. Of course, they have met with the same responses (generic replies, GFC’s fault etc.)

 

My whole take on this is that, outside the media, the ONLY person / group worth complaining to is the Ombudsman. The Minister and DIAC will not care for us unless their jobs are on the line and that will never happen as we cannot vote and are not large enough to make any difference anyway.

The Ombudsman has to deal with issues that are sent their way because they are legally obliged to. These issues, as recently discovered, must be administrative issues.

 

The complaints industry follows a certain unwritten procedure or mantra. When receiving a complaint they can either:

 

1. Deny the issue exists or the complainant is overreacting (rare)

2. Accept the issue exists but owing to unforeseen circumstances say it is not possible to resolve (occasional)

3. Try to pass on a complaint to another person / department by claiming it is out of scope for them to deal with (common)

 

The hope that the complainant will give up is the principal aim of all complaint departments, hence an initial “we can’t do anything” response. I reckon 90% of people DO give up after this initial response as they don’t want to or have the time or strength to carry on running round to different people / departments.

 

Our complaint fell into the third category. While some issues should be dealt with by the Ombudsman there are others in there that they cannot deal with. Unfortunately, it appears that when you give anyone the slightest excuse to fob you off they will do so. So if you have one letter with 6 points, 4 of which are within scope and 2 out of scope the entire thing will be rejected owing to the 2 out of scope issues.

 

Half the battle is knowing HOW to complain.

 

A change of tact is needed so I think the best idea is to not write joint letters complaining about everything but individual letters complaining about single issues (that are within the remit of the Ombudsman).

 

I will put together some text that can be included in the main body of each letter so it will actually just require people to fill in their details and a short intro and then send it to GFU (and then the Ombudsman).

 

At the moment I have the following admin issues that we can complain about:

 

1. Switching to ENS / SMS requires new application and fee – this DEFINITELY falls under admin because they are ignoring their own regulations (http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_reg/mr1994227/s2.08cb.html)

2. Visa fees – I’m working on proving this is an admin issue!

3. Delays – also an admin issue – they might blame GFC, high demand etc. but there have been no measures put in place for lengthy times on BV’s (personally, I think since they didn’t deliver in time we shouldn’t have to pay)

4. Lack of information for applicants – again definitely admin; almost every other nation offers a better tracking system than DIAC’s current miserable excuse and charge much less

 

I might be able to tie refunds into number 3, maybe…

Any comments, suggestions welcome. I will start posting “text bites” for each issue as I write them. These things have to be as watertight as possible so that the Ombudsman cannot come back and say it is out of their remit. Remember they are legally obliged to deal with complaints so they cannot fob off legitimate issues. Enough complaints about DIAC will end up in the right hands eventually but they have to get past the first hurdle to start with.

 

 

Hi Jeffster

 

Firstly just wanted to say thanks for all the time and effort you are putting into this, PIO is very lucky to have you on this site.

 

I dont know if this is relevant but is it worth adding anything in about the fact that after the September changes people started to front load medicals even though they had not been asked to and then got their visas. There were a lot of people who had applied before them and had followed the advise given by DIAC not to front load only to be rewarded with seeing other people who did not follow the rules to be given their visa. I would think that there are still a lot of those applicants who have still not got their visas. Their admin procedures were not followed at all for this they just chose the easy option.

Jules

 

Jules

[Jeffster]

I'm a bit lost there Jules. Isn't it voluntary to front-load meds & PC (except for certain visas where it is compulsory?) I think DIAC would just come back and say it is the applicants choice as to whether they fron load or not.

[Jeffster]

Oh if anyone wants a laugh read this:

 

It’s not what you do, it’s the way that you do it

 

John Ross

September 13, 2010

Campus Review

A refusal often offends. But the immigration department’s taking strides to make sure it’s as inoffensive as possible.

Visa and citizenship applicants might be unhappy with how long the process takes and the result they get at the end of it all. But they’re happy with the attention they receive in the meantime, according to research conducted for the Department of Immigration and Citizenship (DIAC).

The year-long independent project by ORIMA Research quizzed nearly 7500 visa and citizenship applicants, migration agents, sponsors and other people with immigration status issues. It found that around nine in 10 DIAC clients were satisfied with its services.

DIAC has declined to release the report, saying it was commissioned for internal departmental purposes. But it released some of the results, during the August pre-election period.

Around 89 per cent of citizenship applicants told the researchers they were satisfied with their dealings with DIAC, with 87 per cent of respondents saying they were satisfied with their most recent in-person service and 94 per cent giving the thumbs up to the online visa application process.

Of those, 95 per cent said they’d use the online application system again – presumably figuring it was worth another try.

Campus Review sought the response data for student visa applicants, however, DIAC was unable to provide it. But it provided data on student visa holders – the successful applicants, in other words. And they seemed happy enough.

The research showed that 81 per cent of student visa holders were satisfied with the time taken by DIAC to acknowledge their emails, and 78 per cent with the time taken to resolve their issues.

Most student visa holders found the application process easy enough, boding well for their studies ahead. Around 87 per cent found the questions easy to understand, 88 per cent understood the supporting document requirements and 82 per cent thought the form was easy to use.

Around half to two thirds of student visa holders were aware of various DIAC information products such as visa wizards, checklists, fact sheets and information booklets. And those who knew about them liked them, with around 90 per cent giving them the thumbs up.

But the project found that an important issue to all clients, including student visa holders, was being informed about the expected time for processing applications. This is understandable, given that 36 per cent of student visa applicants don’t receive their visas within the timeframes specified by DIAC service standards, according to its latest annual report.

And those standards aren’t exactly demanding: three months for students from ‘high risk’ markets including the top markets of China and India.

While DIAC generally only releases figures for successful visa applicants – it would be tasteless to disclose data on the disappointed – rejection rates doubled between late 2008 and late 2009, according to selected figures released earlier this year.

Nevertheless, as student visa applicants wait longer for an increasingly probable rejection, DIAC is determined to ensure they receive the best possible service.

It said it was implementing “a transformation exercise” to provide more efficient and effective service to all its clients, “in an effort to become the best immigration and citizenship organisation in the world”.

“We listen to our clients, and what we’re hearing is that they want more of our services available online,” a spokesperson said.

“Client feedback like this tells us where we are and what we need to do to meet the challenges posed by emerging demands locally and globally.”

It’s not what you do, it’s the way that you do it - Campus Review