HR applicants where are you now??

[gr8leo87]

Last time I asked him regarding internal/external checks and he replied all required internal checks initiated.

This time I asked him how many check are pending to finalize my application and has security checks started or completed and he send above reply

He did not mention anything about internal checks any more . Seems that internal checks have been completed and security checks are pending

 

All docs MET except PCC and Medicals

Regards

 

It seems your security checks will be prioritized as well since your Form80 is indicated as met. It is also my opinion that internal checks are completed since all of your documents are indicated as met.

[reza]

It seems your security checks will be prioritized as well since your Form80 is indicated as met. It is also my opinion that internal checks are completed since all of your documents are indicated as met.

Do you think we will be safe after July2011 or there is gonna be another disaster ?

Regards

[gr8leo87]

I think we will be fine. No worries. Because we have been assigned case officers already.

[Houciaus2010]

Do you think we will be safe after July2011 or there is gonna be another disaster ?

Regards

 

Don't worry as you will get your visa before July Inshallah:cute:

[musmanasghar]

It seems your security checks will be prioritized as well since your Form80 is indicated as met. It is also my opinion that internal checks are completed since all of your documents are indicated as met.

 

All of my documents are also MET only FORM80 as requested ... so if i take your words about internal Checks then I hope that my Internal checks are also completed ... GR8LEO87 man if i will get my visa soon then party is due on my side .... :biggrin:

[gr8leo87]

All of my documents are also MET only FORM80 as requested ... so if i take your words about internal Checks then I hope that my Internal checks are also completed ... GR8LEO87 man if i will get my visa soon then party is due on my side .... :biggrin:

Hahaha we HR applicants can really use some party man.

 

Its been more than one year now since I have been assigned CO and requested medicals. I don't know when am I gonna get my visa

 

Hey why don't you put your timeline in your signature? It becomes really easier to relate and sympathize to the misery of us HR applicants

[reza]

HR applicants where are you now?? :tongue::tongue:

[musmanasghar]

HR applicants where are you now?? :tongue::tongue:

 

Waiting for good news ...

[inception]

Does the CO do these lenghty security checks involving the ASIO for all HR applicants? I mean, it's kind of ridiculous. There are only a handful of countries listed as low risk. This means, over ninety five percent of the countries are deemed as high risk. This would mean that the majority of the applications that DIAC are processing would be high risk. However, we have seen some applicants from high risk countries get their visa grants in a few days after being assigned a CO. What's the philosophy behind this practice? Is it just applicants from Iran and Pakistan that take this long? Is the processing time less for other high risk countries? If so, why is this the case? Also, is it just one case officer working on your case or is it a whole team that is working together? Sometimes I get the feeling the case officers deliberately try to drag some cases as long as they can for no reason or no logic eventhough all documents have been lodged.

[armandra]

Does the CO do these lenghty security checks involving the ASIO for all HR applicants? I mean, it's kind of ridiculous. There are only a handful of countries listed as low risk. This means, over ninety five percent of the countries are deemed as high risk. This would mean that the majority of the applications that DIAC are processing would be high risk. However, we have seen some applicants from high risk countries get their visa grants in a few days after being assigned a CO. What's the philosophy behind this practice? Is it just applicants from Iran and Pakistan that take this long? Is the processing time less for other high risk countries? If so, why is this the case? Also, is it just one case officer working on your case or is it a whole team that is working together? Sometimes I get the feeling the case officers deliberately try to drag some cases as long as they can for no reason or no logic eventhough all documents have been lodged.

 

Edit: It's Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iran.

 

armandra!

[inception]

I would imagine Iraq and North Korea would be on the 'red' list as well.

[inception]

I am just curious. So Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan take almost a year to do security checks. What about the other HR countries? Do they take less time to do the security checks? I believe the only reason why some applicants from these countries get their visas faster is because the COs at their discretion decide not to run any external security checks on these applicants. I maybe wrong. It doesn't really make sense to me why the ASIO would take 12 months to run security checks on an applicant from Iran and then take as little as 2 days to run security checks for applicants from India, Sri Lanka or Indonesia. Aren't these countries HR as well? I am thinking if any applicant is referred to the ASIO for a background check, regardless of of country, the ASIO will take a long time to process their applications. It's just that some COs don't refer some of their applicants from HR countries to the ASIO or external checking agencies? Am I right in thinking this? One has to be very unfortunate to get a very an***y retentive CO for their application to be delayed indefinitely. Could anyone correct me if I am wrong... thanks.

[reza]

I am just curious. So Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan take almost a year to do security checks. What about the other HR countries? Do they take less time to do the security checks? I believe the only reason why some applicants from these countries get their visas faster is because the COs at their discretion decide not to run any external security checks on these applicants. I maybe wrong. It doesn't really make sense to me why the ASIO would take 12 months to run security checks on an applicant from Iran and then take as little as 2 days to run security checks for applicants from India, Sri Lanka or Indonesia. Aren't these countries HR as well? I am thinking if any applicant is referred to the ASIO for a background check, regardless of of country, the ASIO will take a long time to process their applications. It's just that some COs don't refer some of their applicants from HR countries to the ASIO or external checking agencies? Am I right in thinking this? One has to be very unfortunate to get a very an***y retentive CO for their application to be delayed indefinitely. Could anyone correct me if I am wrong... thanks.

You are 100% right. A friend of mine from Iran got her visa in 1 months after allocation of CO while I am still waiting from DEC2010 ( date of allocation of CO to my application) and am told that my security checks have not been completed yet. So in my opinion they conduct security checks based on CO's request. Most of CO's prefer of conduct for 99% of Iranian applicants.

I never did a crime in my whole life and got PCC from two countries with good conduct but have seen people from UK who have had committed serious crimes and got their visa in less than a week.

What sort of security checks is this ?

People with dirty back ground get their visa and enter Australia and people with good back ground and any sort of crimes wait for ages and eventually get refused due to changes in rules.

They delay our application themselves and refused the application due to their laziness or their bad management

Regards

[Guest Wiggles]

Is Maldives considered an HR country? How long does it take to conduct security checks for applicants from Maldives?

[gr8leo87]

Does the CO do these lenghty security checks involving the ASIO for all HR applicants? I mean, it's kind of ridiculous. There are only a handful of countries listed as low risk. This means, over ninety five percent of the countries are deemed as high risk. This would mean that the majority of the applications that DIAC are processing would be high risk. However, we have seen some applicants from high risk countries get their visa grants in a few days after being assigned a CO. What's the philosophy behind this practice? Is it just applicants from Iran and Pakistan that take this long? Is the processing time less for other high risk countries? If so, why is this the case? Also, is it just one case officer working on your case or is it a whole team that is working together? Sometimes I get the feeling the case officers deliberately try to drag some cases as long as they can for no reason or no logic eventhough all documents have been lodged.

They do it on the materiality of risk basis. Plus the length can also depend upon the efficiency of the HR applicant's country's agencies.

 

A person from an HR country like Brazil would pose a lesser risk compared to an HR applicant from say Pakistan, Afghanistan or Iran.

[sherin]

Hi All

I am also stuck with the Internal Checking... but in my case it is specifically mentioned that my work experience needs further checking...

I have been waiting for the verification call none has happened yet I have a CO from November 5 months and waiting.....

Does anybody know how much time does DIAC usually take if its only for employment verification?

And how does one know the verification is done or not?

[rubai009]

You are 100% right. A friend of mine from Iran got her visa in 1 months after allocation of CO while I am still waiting from DEC2010 ( date of allocation of CO to my application) and am told that my security checks have not been completed yet. So in my opinion they conduct security checks based on CO's request. Most of CO's prefer of conduct for 99% of Iranian applicants.

I never did a crime in my whole life and got PCC from two countries with good conduct but have seen people from UK who have had committed serious crimes and got their visa in less than a week.

What sort of security checks is this ?

People with dirty back ground get their visa and enter Australia and people with good back ground and any sort of crimes wait for ages and eventually get refused due to changes in rules.

They delay our application themselves and refused the application due to their laziness or their bad management

Regards

 

 

 

 

 

 

I m from Bangladesh but still waiting for 7 months after CO being allocated !!!

[joynaldx]

I m from Bangladesh but still waiting for 7 months after CO being allocated !!!

 

Hi Rubai009

me too from Bangladesh...CO also told me to wait 6-12 month for security check....

[User Name]

You are 100% right. A friend of mine from Iran got her visa in 1 months after allocation of CO while I am still waiting from DEC2010 ( date of allocation of CO to my application) and am told that my security checks have not been completed yet. So in my opinion they conduct security checks based on CO's request. Most of CO's prefer of conduct for 99% of Iranian applicants.

I never did a crime in my whole life and got PCC from two countries with good conduct but have seen people from UK who have had committed serious crimes and got their visa in less than a week.

What sort of security checks is this ?

People with dirty back ground get their visa and enter Australia and people with good back ground and any sort of crimes wait for ages and eventually get refused due to changes in rules.

They delay our application themselves and refused the application due to their laziness or their bad management

Regards

 

I think your argument is rather flawed. Reason why it takes long is because its hard to verify documents from HR countries as opposed to LR. Its not that they are letting LR applicants have it easy.

 

And there is no one to blame but the screwed up government of these HR countries, not Australia or DIAC.

 

Of course being from LR country doesn't mean you are goody two shoes, but its easier to verify the person's past in more depth if they are LR as opposed to HR.

 

Also its easy to forge your documents if you are from certain HR countries like changing your birth date, forging financial documents, change certain information to gain favourable outcome. Stuff like this are hard to verify if you are from HR.

 

Whether or not you commited any crime, CO will want to know your entire background before making a decision.

 

Otherwise its not fair for those LR who have all their whole past written in black and white while certian HR applicants can easily conceal anything that can jeopardize their application. Its also a matter of security issue.

 

PS: for the record I am also from HR facing upto 6 month wait for these so called checks. But only one I can blame is the f*****ed government of my country.

[Guest MOTO]

@ User Name

 

I have a feeling that your visa will be granted in the next couple of weeks.

Try to relax man.

 

Regards,

MOTO

[Guest guest41018]

It seems your security checks will be prioritized as well since your Form80 is indicated as met. It is also my opinion that internal checks are completed since all of your documents are indicated as met.

 

Unfortunately, online status tends to mean nothing; many people have had visas granted with almost everything listed as "required" whereas others are undergoing security checks notwithstanding the fact that the Form 80 is listed as "met" - it probably means little more than received.

[Guest guest41018]

I would imagine Iraq and North Korea would be on the 'red' list as well.

 

Indeed, and add the Palestinian Authority, Bangladesh, Yemen, Bahrain, probably Libya now and anywhere where there is ongoing political strife/instability. I daresay Zimbabwe might be one too.

[Guest guest41018]

I think your argument is rather flawed. Reason why it takes long is because its hard to verify documents from HR countries as opposed to LR. Its not that they are letting LR applicants have it easy.

 

And there is no one to blame but the screwed up government of these HR countries, not Australia or DIAC.

 

Of course being from LR country doesn't mean you are goody two shoes, but its easier to verify the person's past in more depth if they are LR as opposed to HR.

 

Also its easy to forge your documents if you are from certain HR countries like changing your birth date, forging financial documents, change certain information to gain favourable outcome. Stuff like this are hard to verify if you are from HR.

 

Whether or not you commited any crime, CO will want to know your entire background before making a decision.

 

Otherwise its not fair for those LR who have all their whole past written in black and white while certian HR applicants can easily conceal anything that can jeopardize their application. Its also a matter of security issue.

 

PS: for the record I am also from HR facing upto 6 month wait for these so called checks. But only one I can blame is the f*****ed government of my country.

 

The (external) security checks have nothing to do with verification of documents, so your assertion doesn't hold - they form part of DIAC's own internal checks. It's clear you are pandering somewhat in the hope that someone from DIAC/other agency might be reading what you are writing and expedite your application.

 

The processing of applications depends on DIAC/other agencies as much as it does on the authorities from the country of application, to pretend that it's ALL the fault of the HR country is somewhat disingenuous. I know it's fashionable to pretend to be against your country if it scores you some points, but don't be surprised if, in the future, somebody forms an opinion of you and those from your country of origin before they have even met you on account of similar comments made by others - intellectually prostituting oneself and pretending you are not an HR applicant (or somehow superior) helps nobody, not even yourself. You seem to forget that the information provided for the assessment comes from your own government agencies so throwing expletives about them on a public forum isn't exactly a stroke of genius.

 

Security is, understandably, a concern, but there is surely a limit on what is and isn't reasonable, what is and isn't excessive and what time period for this is too much. It's obvious that all countries around the world hold lists of dodgy individuals on databases, so quite why it takes so long to find out if an applicant is on one is anybody's guess. Logically, one would have thought that if there were concerns about any individual, the information should be available within the hour, not a year or more later.

[Guest guest41018]

I am just curious. So Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan take almost a year to do security checks. What about the other HR countries? Do they take less time to do the security checks? I believe the only reason why some applicants from these countries get their visas faster is because the COs at their discretion decide not to run any external security checks on these applicants. I maybe wrong. It doesn't really make sense to me why the ASIO would take 12 months to run security checks on an applicant from Iran and then take as little as 2 days to run security checks for applicants from India, Sri Lanka or Indonesia. Aren't these countries HR as well? I am thinking if any applicant is referred to the ASIO for a background check, regardless of of country, the ASIO will take a long time to process their applications. It's just that some COs don't refer some of their applicants from HR countries to the ASIO or external checking agencies? Am I right in thinking this? One has to be very unfortunate to get a very an***y retentive CO for their application to be delayed indefinitely. Could anyone correct me if I am wrong... thanks.

 

They don't do assessments on all HR applicants and it's only a relatively small proportion and it is at the discretion of the CO on the basis of their own internal risk-management guidelines. Nobody takes 2 days for such an assessment, they just haven't been referred.

[armandra]

I think your argument is rather flawed. Reason why it takes long is because its hard to verify documents from HR countries as opposed to LR. Its not that they are letting LR applicants have it easy.

 

And there is no one to blame but the screwed up government of these HR countries, not Australia or DIAC.

 

Of course being from LR country doesn't mean you are goody two shoes, but its easier to verify the person's past in more depth if they are LR as opposed to HR.

 

Also its easy to forge your documents if you are from certain HR countries like changing your birth date, forging financial documents, change certain information to gain favourable outcome. Stuff like this are hard to verify if you are from HR.

 

Whether or not you commited any crime, CO will want to know your entire background before making a decision.

 

Otherwise its not fair for those LR who have all their whole past written in black and white while certian HR applicants can easily conceal anything that can jeopardize their application. Its also a matter of security issue.

 

PS: for the record I am also from HR facing upto 6 month wait for these so called checks. But only one I can blame is the f*****ed government of my country.

 

It's not just the governments of HR countries that are responsible for DIAC categorising them as HR. Consideration is also given to citizens of every country who have applied for Australian visas, be it temporary or permanent, and the number of cases wherein it was later proved that they have tampered with documents and/or deliberately mislead the CO.

 

Say, out of 10 people migrating from country A, two are proved in the future (say while employer is conducting background checks) to have concocted their past job details and out of 10 people migrating from country B, eight are proved to have tampered with docs, then it is common sense to categorise country A as HR and country B as Very HR. Simple.

 

And as far as Afghanistan, Iran and Pakistan are concerned, it's not just about verifying the criminal background and ingenuity of the documentation provided, but also determining if the applicant has in the past (or chances in the future) been part of any terrorist organisation, which needs to be cleared by one or more agencies before the visa can be granted.

 

The (external) security checks have nothing to do with verification of documents, so your assertion doesn't hold - they form part of DIAC's own internal checks. It's clear you are pandering somewhat in the hope that someone from DIAC/other agency might be reading what you are writing and expedite your application.

 

The processing of applications depends on DIAC/other agencies as much as it does on the authorities from the country of application, to pretend that it's ALL the fault of the HR country is somewhat disingenuous. I know it's fashionable to pretend to be against your country if it scores you some points, but don't be surprised if, in the future, somebody forms an opinion of you and those from your country of origin before they have even met you on account of similar comments made by others - intellectually prostituting oneself and pretending you are not an HR applicant (or somehow superior) helps nobody, not even yourself. You seem to forget that the information provided for the assessment comes from your own government agencies so throwing expletives about them on a public forum isn't exactly a stroke of genius.

 

Security is, understandably, a concern, but there is surely a limit on what is and isn't reasonable, what is and isn't excessive and what time period for this is too much. It's obvious that all countries around the world hold lists of dodgy individuals on databases, so quite why it takes so long to find out if an applicant is on one is anybody's guess. Logically, one would have thought that if there were concerns about any individual, the information should be available within the hour, not a year or more later.

 

And how do you decide what is reasonable and what isn't then? Obviously, since it's Australian government through DIAC who have the ultimate authority to set what is reasonable and what isn't, we have no say on that.

 

P.S: No amount of debate on what is right and reasonable and what isn't going to solve the issue since it is always subjective. Emphasis ought to be on finding out why things are the way they are and not on ranting or mud slinging on other forum members. No one's gonna get anything outta it.

 

 

armandra!