"Offshore" GSM visa granted onshore - is it possible?

[Guest Yury]

Is it actually possible to get a decision regarding “offshore” GSM application without leaving Australia?

 

Cause frankly that “Location” requirement is absurd.

 

I am on substantive temporary visa (457) that allows me to live and work in AU, and hopefully within its validity period I would be notified that my PR (176) application is decision ready and I must leave the country to get a verdict.

 

There are only two outcomes possible –

1) PR is granted, so having spent significant amount of money just to fly all family somewhere and stamp my passport I would be back.

2) PR is refused, but there are no reason to cancel my active temporary visa, it remains unaffected (hopefully – they can’t cancel it right? for what reason? …if I’m within my contract with employer). Thus I will fly back and continue as before.

 

So what's exactly the point of whole exercise? What is the purpose, if I anyway end up onshore in couple of days? Just to sponsor airlines and give DIAC offices overseas some work?

 

Is there any way around this requirement?

Thanks for advice

[Guest gryhawk]

Is it actually possible to get a decision regarding “offshore” GSM application without leaving Australia?

 

Cause frankly that “Location” requirement is absurd.

 

I am on substantive temporary visa (457) that allows me to live and work in AU, and hopefully within its validity period I would be notified that my PR (176) application is decision ready and I must leave the country to get a verdict.

 

There are only two outcomes possible –

1) PR is granted, so having spent significant amount of money just to fly all family somewhere and stamp my passport I would be back.

2) PR is refused, but there are no reason to cancel my active temporary visa, it remains unaffected (hopefully – they can’t cancel it right? for what reason? …if I’m within my contract with employer). Thus I will fly back and continue as before.

 

So what's exactly the point of whole exercise? What is the purpose, if I anyway end up onshore in couple of days? Just to sponsor airlines and give DIAC offices overseas some work?

 

Is there any way around this requirement?

Thanks for advice

 

There is no way around this requirement (unless mods/MAs have a better idea) and it is not absurd. You would have known full well this was an offshore 176 visa that you have applied for when you commenced your application. There is nothing in legislation that says the criteria (offshore grant) should be 'flexible' just because it is an 'inconvenience' or it 'costs more money'

 

If this was an issue, you should have applied onshore. I'm sure circumstances changed for you and you were able to obtain your 457 after submitting the 176, but your visa remains the same as what you have applied for, an offshore visa. It's unfair (to you), but it is not as if DIAC sprung this on you at the last minute. Just do your visa run to NZ with the family and be glad that you have your visa.

 

Of course, you could just be indignant and allow your visa to fail. That is just an injustice to all those behind you in the queue that you would think your visa could be a toy to fling out of the pram when you are not 'satisfied' with the requirements that you are fully aware of. You would have wasted time and resources taken to process your visa, not to mention someone more deserving should have taken your spot in the queue.

[Guest Yury]

Dear gryhawk,

 

with all due respect I'd appreciate if you spare me your groundless assumptions about my circumstances, lectures how I should cherish what I have, multiple ironic quotes and judgement on who deserves what.

Your opinion that you don't see the waiver possible would have sufficed.

 

On the topic - even DIAC's own 457 integrity review recommended that 457 visa holders should be allowed to apply onshore. Unfortunately it wasn't followed by then Minister Evans. So you can see I'm not the only one thinking condition is absurd.

 

So my questions were

- the rationale behind "Location" requirement

- how flexible it is

...and you answered none of them.

 

Of course I wouldn't think of giving up my visa on this technicality. But if I could save time and money (which DIAC had enough from me already) I would, as any reasonable person. And believe me I sympathize with all fellow applicants in queue, where I'm myself currently waiting as everybody else.

 

So keep your frustrations to yourself.

Any actual advice would be sincerely appreciated.

 

Cheers

[Guest gryhawk]

Dear Yury,

 

Answer to your question:

From MigReg1994

176.4 Circumstances applicable to grant

176.411 If the applicant who satisfied the primary criteria for the grant of the visa is also the holder of a Subclass 444 (Special Category) visa, each applicant included in the application may be in or outside Australia when the visa is granted.

176.412 In any other case, each applicant included in the application must be outside Australia when the visa is granted.

 

So, if you are in Subclass 444, then you may be in or outside of Australia.

 

You are right that I was jumping to conclusions on your circumstances and have no full comprehension of your situation. For that I apologize. The fact remains that you were not caught unaware of this requirement. Yes, your circumstance has changed, but that does not mean that immigration regulations should change to fit your situation. Sure, it's inconvenient and costly to do what it takes to complete your visa application, but it is the same for people who are beholden to established rules and regulations.

 

An exception cannot be made just because it appears to be impractical to some. Would you expect 176 grants for people who are offshore to be able to go onshore to obtain them? Would the reciprocal be practical for 886 grants to be granted offshore on the whims and fancies of the applicant?

 

That is simply what I am getting at.

 

Cheers too.

[Guest gryhawk]

Plus, the 457 integrity review is a wholly different argument altogether.