Australia Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

Report: NSW Onshore Partner Application Processing Time Est: 15 months

13K views 49 replies 18 participants last post by  Adventuress 
#1 ·
Hi All -

I read some very depressing news tonight from another agent who recently spoke to DIAC's temporary partner processing section in Sydney and is reporting that the current estimated wait time for partner visa processing (onshore, NSW) is "over 15 months." Additionally, decision-ready (DR) processing for partner visas in NSW has all but been abandoned as so many applications are now coming in as "decision-ready" that DIAC apparently thinks it would not be "equitable" to give all of them priority processing as it would unfairly disadvantage all the non-DR applications. So all partner applications are being processed in NSW in one queue now, not a separate queue for DR and non-DR.

Given reports of processing times less than this, I think there is still hope for those who lodge DR applications and have a bit of luck. But if this report is accurate, it represents a major delay in processing these applications, and as far as I'm concerned, it's simply not fair, just or "equitable" to force married or defacto couples to wait this long simply to have their visa processed.

I really have to wonder what DIAC's priorities are at this point. Assuming this report is true, they are willing to live with a steep decrease in processing standards, while at the same time increasing the application fee significantly. Where is the accountability? Where is the fairness to visa applicants and their families? And where is the responsible management at DIAC being accountable for such a shocking slippage in delivery standards?

It occurs to me that a collective body of visa applicants and those who care about the rights of visa applicants may be in order. It's simply too easy to deliver poor service when for most people it's a one-shot deal and they have no continuing involvement with the government after the visa is granted. I would be happy to be involved with such an organisation, but for it to have credibility it should be led by those directly affected by the issue.

Any thoughts? Sorry to be the bearer of bad news tonight, but we all in one way or another have a stake in timely visa processing, and I just see things these days getting worse, and let's not even talk about the haphazard and inconsistent offshore partner visa processing that is discussed at length here. Ideally the interests of both onshore and offshore applicants could be addressed by such an organisation, similar to the way that Bus Rider's Unions have lobbied municipalities, etc in the USA to battle fare increases and poor service.

Best,

Mark Northam
 
See less See more
#2 ·
Mark,

Thank you very much for posting this. I have often suggested the same thing that you are - we need some some kind of organised body that fights for the right of potential migrants and visa applicants. There is no transparency or accountability in the process the way it is, and yes, it is ridiculously unfair that fees are increased while service standards drop. Something needs to be done by us, their clients.

This is too much power for one government department to wield. And they appear to be invincible - applicants fear to make complaints because they're afraid it would affect their applications, while at the same time, the department answers to nobody. Once a visa is declined, there appears to be no recourse except to pay for an appeal and to sit back and wait even more months to be heard. What happens when case officers make mistakes, misunderstandings or downright lie in refusing applications? There are plenty of examples to be found on this forum.

I think the first step is to develop a campaign of information. This issue can affect any Australian these days, what with increased mobility and globalisation, and yet most Australians don't know a thing about what they're up against until they're caught facing the system, and then they have nowhere to go. If we, first of all, let other people know about how things actually are, I'm willing to bet there'd be a whole lot more outrage in support of us.

This thread would be a great place to discuss what we can do together to fight this unfair system. What would be the first steps to organising a representative body and giving it legal status?
 
#3 ·
#5 · (Edited)
Thank you for sharing the news, your opinion and the suggestion, Mark.

*steps on soapbox* (deepest apologies for the essay I just realized this turned into)

I have to say first of all I find it hard to speak out about this. I can't put my finger on exactly why. Maybe it's because I've worked in customer service at a bank and no matter how hard I worked, the system was so flawed that I sometimes could not provide the service needed and I was still the one in the chain who got to then deal with the angry customers - maybe that's made me more aware that I don't want to hurt the feelings of Case Officers who do try. Or maybe because somewhere deep inside me hides a little bit of paranoia - I'm sure people from DIAC have come across this forum, and I'm fairly sure there's not that many Dutch Nelly's applying in Melbourne that were born in '87, and I don't want them to think I am ungrateful as I have only turned in my application a few days ago and they might actually be trying for me and then off I go online about how they are too slow... I don't know. I do realize this issue's obviously bigger than me and my case.

Over the past two years I have caught my partner saying several times: I am an Australian citizen with a spotless history and not even half a trace of ever being involved with anything suspicious, why can't I just have my girlfriend here without having to beg, beg and beg some more. I in turn have caught myself wondering - I've been nothing but an absolute stand-up citizen in my own country, if they took a few days to verify all my Form 80 information they would get confirmed I am spotless, why am I being made to feel like I am a criminal trying to clear herself... but such is the process.

That said, there is a core of truth in both those sentiments - Australian citizens are entitled to care from their government, and that includes not causing unnecessary months or years of emotional stress just to hear the verdict on a partner visa that can practically be seen as a trial period for the actual partner visa with permanent residency. But I could be wrong.

Temporary Onshore is not a life or death decision, and I have always wondered why so incredibly much weight is put and invested into allowing the Temporary phase if it will be completely reevaluated anyway two years later before Permanent Residence is even considered. I read somewhere the denial percentage is much higher on the 801 than on the 820 because many couples do end up splitting up after two years - and after giving a couple two years together in Australia, shouldn't it be so much more evident how serious and real they are? People who apply for the Temporary often haven't even had a chance to build up the amount of evidence expected, how can you have much proof of a physical joint life together if you do not have a partner visa... why don't they put more into processing 801 and less into PMV and 802 so at least couples can be together and build a fair life together before it gets assessed? The system is flawed in my opinion, but I am not an expert and I deeply sympathize with all the case-officers who do work hard to do this right because I know how they feel... they have peoples' lives in their hands and they must take it seriously and they must want to approve everyone they have a good feeling about as soon as possible.

But the waiting times I agree are out of hand. I'd be happy to join some kind of organization of group for that and at the same time this paranoid little voice in my hand says... why do you want to bite the hand that might eventually (after 15+ months) feed you... stupid I know. That's the problem with partner visas. They are emotional and applicants cannot always be expected to be reasonable and wait x amount time because of this and that, because it is a highly personal visa and last time I checked to love was such a basic human right it doesn't even need to be put in a law.

That is part of the problem, too. DIAC can just stretch and not adapt to increasing workload. What are the people with pending applications going to do? Risk making a bad impression by protesting when they are essentially being evaluated largely on character? I think not.

At the end of the day I can honestly say - I wouldn't mind waiting months, years to be allowed to be with my partner, as long as I feel we get a fair chance to prove how genuine we are. And with the current system, I don't feel that is entirely the case. I think they do it as fairly as possible, with as much information they can process, but that doesn't mean it's truly fair. I will wait 10 years for an approval, but I will not wait 15 months for a rejection because the only way a genuine couple can get rejected is if they haven't been given a proper chance to prove themselves. For instance never having been able to save up to build that ideal life together before because we were always flying back and forth. For instance because paperwork is paperwork but anyone can share finances - if you're going to make me wait over a year, would you mind visiting my home to see with your own eyes? But that's not how it works. Times increase but effectiveness stays the same and that is what's unfair in my opinion. They do not change the system to allow people to prove themselves more elaborately, and they do not change the system to give people more of a chance to actually genuinely produce that ideal evidence (I am sure in two years my partner and I will have our own house, for instance), but they are comfortable changing the waiting time and that's not fair. If they were meanwhile openly working on improving chances for genuine couples, yes. But I have not seen a single announcement of that (but maybe it's like the form changes... wooossshh) - in fact the only announcement I have seen from Immigration since my partner and I started planning to apply for this visa, was that we were going to have to cough up an additional $1000. Something just isn't right somewhere. But then again, it's an emotional visa, for us anyway, and I am not sure how eloquent I'll ever be about it because it's got all our joint hopes and dreams (which are not evidence even though they're joint :p) weighed onto it.

Maybe I'm wrong. I'll be happy to be corrected if I am. I am not trying to attack DIAC or anyone working there. But there is always room for improvement in large organizations, I know because I've seen it from the inside, and I hope if not for our sake then for the sake of those others waiting forever to just be with their partner, that at some point DIAC will realize if you increase what you ask of people, you may also increase what you yourself give in some way.
 
#6 ·
Wow, just read back - really sorry about that! Shouldn't rant so much, now my head hurts and I need a long shower to figure out what I just thought :p
 
#7 ·
Thanks Nelly, I really liked what you wrote. I would like to add that this visa waiting is not just emotional, it is existential problem as well. I finished my work contracts but couldn't accept new ones because our plan is to migrate permanently. I can't promise my customers to finish my job in May or June if I plan to move whenever visa is granted. So as people could be in limbo emotionally they could be in business limbo, too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nelly87
#8 ·
That is another very good point... life stagnates. Even onshore, lucky as we are to be together, we stagnate. What if we sign a lease - I have the income right now of the two of us, and we get rejected? My unemployed partner, sponsor, will be stuck with the lease. Even if he wasn't unemployed - if we were both working we would want to start looking at buying a house... not gonna buy a house if I can't stay.

It all looks like "it's just a house" but when you've already been waiting to finally properly start your life together for 2 years, it gets a bit much.
 
#9 ·
Surely this wouldnt effect offshore aplications, i,e people going through Berlin for example. Or would it? Oh my heart goes out to all of you still waiting, what a sickner this news is.
 
#11 ·
It would affect offshore applications, louiseb. My CO already told me that now it is 1 year, not 7-9 months any more. :(
 
#10 ·
Wow. I must say I am a bit shocked about what Mark said. 15 months is the average waiting time now, that means that a lot of people with not-so-clear cases are easily in for a 24 months wait! Just like that!
I don't know why DIAC is obviously struggling so much to keep ahead of their workload. Is it pure lazyness? Are they hoping that people will be deterred by the price increase and the long waiting times, a very smooth way to cut the number of migrants? Or is there simply no funding for additional staff, and the way they deal with applications is outdated and made for a time where there were a lot less applicants?

I think a good way to start out with some kind of "protest" would be to increase the public awareness. I know so many people here that are somehow connected to people on partner visas (friends, colleagues, family members etc.) and every time I talk to them about the whole process they are very surprised. They immediately side with me saying that they can't believe what applicants and their partners are going through, but they have never heard of it before or were even concerned with it (and why would they, really).

Making people aware of that people they meet every day, people like them, their neighbours and colleagues, are affected by this system and that even they themselves could one day be affected in this multicultural world could move a lot, I think.
They would see how a government department tries his best to hide how it is working, not telling people anything, raising fees unexpectedly and without a proper reason and on the other hand failing to come up with anything remotely related to 'customer service'.

My hope is that the public will start to think about it and speak out. Just think about the recent 'Occupy' protests, and a lot of the people participating weren't even personally affected, it was an outcry against the general injustice.
An open letter to the government might also be a good idea. If someone can find a way to publish it in a newspaper, even better. Now that I think about it, if anyone is working/knows someone who is working at a newspaper, it might be worth publishing an article about it, or a letter to the editor.

These are just my two cents.
 
#13 ·
So as a layman - do petitions actually do anything? And if so, for one to have effect in Australia would it be best to go with Australian signatures only, or add international ones of applicants' family members as well?
 
#14 ·
With all applications computerised, I'm sure DIAC has stats on progress and processing times.
They would have certain targets that they'd like to meet, but I read somewhere on the immi website, that there are approx 14,000 new applications every month.
Most come from NZ and Oceania, followed by China then the UK and others.

High risk countries figure in the lowest percentage of applications.
These stats include all applications.

A bit of interesting info.
"Priority processing times

Application processing times are given priority depending on which Family Stream visa you apply for. The following are examples of priority processing times:

  • Higher priority is given to immediate family such as those applying within the Partner or Child categories. This includes dependent children, children for adoption, orphan relatives, partners and fiancés.
  • Higher priority is given to those applying for Carers visas. Carers fall within the Other Family category. The higher priority is in recognition of the support they provide to Australian residents with a serious medical condition and their contribution to the community.
  • Higher priority is given to those applying for the Contributory Parent visa rather than those applying for the Parent visa within the Parent category.
  • Lower priority is given to other applicants who fall within the Other Family category such as Remaining Relatives, and Aged Dependent Relatives."
 
#15 ·
I personally don't think the timeframe is the worst part of it when you're applying onshore. At the end of the day we are lucky enough to be home with our loved ones. What really bugs me is I'm not "authorized" to leave the country until my visa has been approved.

15 months is a long time to put one's life on hold especially when you know deep down you're going to be approved anyway... When I think about all the things we will be missing back in Europe just because we're waiting on my Temp Partner Visa to be approved, it really sickens me. They want you to build a real relationship, to do things together so you can "prove" it's all genuine. Realistically, in increasing the processing times, they're just making it yet more complicated for people to start their real life together and give them proof they are in a committed relationship.

Seeing that I'll be applying for my visa in a week or so, I now know I won't be able to make it to my cousin's wedding next year, and also know we won't be able to start planning our European wedding for yet another couple of years. This is ridiculous.

And I feel so sorry for those who are waiting abroad, hoping to get the good news on a daily basis :(

In saying that though, why is it some people on this forum have managed to get their visa approved within weeks? What is it that makes them worth the grant more so than someone else?
 
#21 ·
I personally don't think the timeframe is the worst part of it when you're applying onshore. At the end of the day we are lucky enough to be home with our loved ones. What really bugs me is I'm not "authorized" to leave the country until my visa has been approved.

15 months is a long time to put one's life on hold especially when you know deep down you're going to be approved anyway... When I think about all the things we will be missing back in Europe just because we're waiting on my Temp Partner Visa to be approved, it really sickens me. They want you to build a real relationship, to do things together so you can "prove" it's all genuine. Realistically, in increasing the processing times, they're just making it yet more complicated for people to start their real life together and give them proof they are in a committed relationship.

Seeing that I'll be applying for my visa in a week or so, I now know I won't be able to make it to my cousin's wedding next year, and also know we won't be able to start planning our European wedding for yet another couple of years. This is ridiculous.

And I feel so sorry for those who are waiting abroad, hoping to get the good news on a daily basis :(

In saying that though, why is it some people on this forum have managed to get their visa approved within weeks? What is it that makes them worth the grant more so than someone else?
I wish I knew deep down I'm going to be approved anyway... that would take a lot of anxiety out of the wait.

But good luck with BVB :) sounds like you definitely have the circumstances for it, I hope they won't make you miss the wedding!
 
#16 ·
Hi Krysthell -

Assuming you're applying onshore and are "legal" when you apply, you'll likely get a Bridging Visa A, which allows you to apply for a Bridging Visa B for a trip offshore for "substantial" reasons, which in my experience would include a family wedding. You can apply for multiple BV-B's over the course of your processing as long as the trips are for "substantial" reasons.

Back in the good old days (3 years ago), some onshore partner visas were approved on the spot at the counter at DIAC! Even as recently as 2011 I've seen onshore partner visas approved in a few weeks in some cases where the application was decision-ready, all docs were included and there were no unusual circumstances about the visa application.

I still have to believe that application packages that have all docs and no unusual circumstances still will get (somewhat) faster processing than others.

Best,

Mark Northam
 
#17 ·
Hi Krysthell -

Assuming you're applying onshore and are "legal" when you apply, you'll likely get a Bridging Visa A, which allows you to apply for a Bridging Visa B for a trip offshore for "substantial" reasons, which in my experience would include a family wedding. You can apply for multiple BV-B's over the course of your processing as long as the trips are for "substantial" reasons.

Back in the good old days (3 years ago), some onshore partner visas were approved on the spot at the counter at DIAC! Even as recently as 2011 I've seen onshore partner visas approved in a few weeks in some cases where the application was decision-ready, all docs were included and there were no unusual circumstances about the visa application.

I still have to believe that application packages that have all docs and no unusual circumstances still will get (somewhat) faster processing than others.

Best,

Mark Northam
Thank you Mark.
I just didn't think a family wedding was a substantial reason as far as immigration was concerned but it is somewhat of a relief.
 
#20 ·
Hi Philip -

Glad I could help. BV's are a confusing subject for many.

With BV-B's, the key is to show the trip is substantial. That being said, if you're nearing visa grant, they generally won't approve a BV-B, and the longest I've seen a BV-B issued for is 3 months generally - more often they're issued for 1 or 2 months or however long (shorter than 3 months) you request.

Best,

Mark Northam
 
#22 ·
This is really frustrating and upsetting. Not to mention confusing! I have just spoken to "Lea" on the DIAC hotline, who GUARANTEED that if we hand in a DR application (onshore partner visa) that not only would we have a faster processing time, but
a) the italian police checks (normally valid only six months) would be valid for 12 months.
b) my partner would NOT have to re-submit any expired medicals or police checks, in the case that the "guaranteed" short processing time exceeded 12 months. (Obviously contradicting the first guarantee..)
She also said that on his application he needn't write down every entry and departure date of multiple visits to the same country.

This is after reading Mark's post and the original blog post. And after previously talking to someone else on the DIAC hotline who said that they CANNOT guarantee quicker processing times for DRA.
Personally, I'm not going to kill myself running around at last minute (his WHV expires late March) collecting forms, paying heaps of money etc in order to hand in a DRA on the back of what ONE person has said.
This process is already time consuming and emotionally draining without being given contradictory and/or confusing advice too.

However we are so lucky that we are both in the same country already and we can afford to pay the fees.
Good luck everyone!
P.S. Mark - we are applying for a bridging visa B as we have booked flights to return to Italy for a holiday for 6 weeks and to celebrate his parents wedding anniversary.. Do you think that will suffice? :) We desperately need a holiday after all of this!
 
#23 ·
Hi Tahlia -

Sounds like a good Bridging Visa B application reason to me! - Best to apply 1-2 weeks before you wish to leave, and bring your flight booking info and any other evidence with you just in case (ie wedding information or plans, even emails, etc) - it's often not necessary, but just in case you get stuck with a picky case officer, always ready to be prepared.

Happy and safe travels!

Best,

Mark
 
#26 ·
Thought I'd throw this one in there too since I just received the acknowledgement letter:

Processing times
The onshore partner visa program is experiencing strong
demand, and as a result, the current average processing
time for subclass 820 applications is around 13 months
from lodgement. Note that this is an average processing
time, and the actual processing time for each application
may vary significantly, and in many cases may be
significantly shorter, or longer, than the average
Applications which are fully documented will generally be
processed more quickly than applications which are
incomplete, so please ensure that if you have not yet
provided us with all the necessary documentation that
you do so as soon as possible.



So yeah 13months average is pretty bad but we'll see how I go. They received mine on Valentine's day. Hope it'll be a good omen!
 
#27 ·
Mark....would you consider getting in contact with 60 minutes...the age...the Herald Sun...Today Tonight (I know the calibre is slipping as I write) and sharing the story...the reality, the ins and outs...the tragedy of the situation both on and off shore for the Australian population to see how much stress and agony the legit people go through to get here?

I can see the headlines now - "Julia does it both way - traumatises legal and illegal immigrants!"
 
#29 ·
Sorry to resurrect a month-old thread, I only recently found the blog article written by Grant Williams on my own, then found this thread here. Here's a question that has no answer: why on earth has DIAC not updated this page? Client Service Charter

Is it really good practise to get people thinking they'll have their temp partner visa processed in 6 - 8 months?? On Grant's blog I read a post by a fellow who submitted his 820 application in person at the Melbourne office on March 7th of this year, and was granted his visa on March 22nd. Yet they prefer applications by post... what on earth is going on with DIAC? If this was a private corporation they'd be bankrupt and facing lawsuits by now.

I know there are no answers to be had out of this messy, messy thing. I don't know what I'd do without these forums, the support and sense of community they provide. Not to mention the great venting platform!
 
#30 ·
I would like to say that it is laziness that they haven't updated the pages but I think it is more strategic than that. In the end I think it has nothing to do with us, the consumers of their service, and a lot to do with the appearance in an election year and how this would reflect upon the minister and the government.

I think that they only way that these kind of things and the other great points that you raised can and will be changed is when there is public outcry and I cant only see this happening when people like us take the venting from the forum to the media....places like the newspapers and the current affairs shows.

This is the time to make the noise with it being an election year if it is going to change they will have the most incentive to do something now.
 
#31 ·
It occurs to me that a collective body of visa applicants and those who care about the rights of visa applicants may be in order. It's simply too easy to deliver poor service when for most people it's a one-shot deal and they have no continuing involvement with the government after the visa is granted. I would be happy to be involved with such an organisation, but for it to have credibility it should be led by those directly affected by the issue.
Having not even submitted my application yet, it already makes me angry that the anticipated waiting period will be that long especially after having to save up so much money for the initial application.

Coming back to the original thought, in my opinion it is long overdue that such a body is established. How is it even possible that an organization that deals with highly sensitive issues like DIAC has to answer to no one?

Even if there might be COs out there who are slow and lazy, I can only assume that the system itself is fault and the issue lies with workloads (aka too many applications assigned to one CO - they must be frustrated too!!). How can there be an enormous increase in fees if the money doesn't go back into the system, for example into hiring more staff or making the process more efficient and transparent? This is simply unjustifiable! Where DOES the money go??

On top of that, making people wait and putting their life on hold only hurts the system in the end. With that many people waiting in Australia, many of them not able to work due to restrictions or simply not able to find employment because of the temporary character of bridging visas (and even the temporary partner visa once it is issued) puts many in a position that makes it more likely to have to rely on the welfare system in the future.

Every other organisation or body has to answer to a controlling body, why is there no possibility to do anything about how DIAC works? I have to agree with Kantata, if this was a private coorporation they would be bankrupt. If they can't handle the flood of applications there are many ways of improve the system! Not only employing more people, also more informations for applicants on how to fill out forms correctly and how to put together an application, so COs don't have to sort through paperwork that is different for every application!

Having said that, I think establishing such a body that tries to make the issue more public and change how things are being handled must come from Australians first, not only people who are personally effected but also people that just see that it is an issue. Even though most people who got their Visa are probably just glad and don't ever want to hear about it again, I'm sure there are plenty who would be willing to be part of this after they have their Visa in their hands. I agree that everyone who is still in the application process probably just doesn't want to be publicly involved in making a fuss.

It is also a big problem for Immigration Agents I assume because they need to provide a service and, I assume, are dealing with a lot of unsatisfied customers as well if DIAC makes it impossible to speed up applications! Would it make sense to have someone speak up from that side? There would surely be a lot of backup from everyone affected? Even though, I think as a migration agent you actually are affected directly as well, because DIAC makes it hard to deliver a service, if they don't even make a difference in processing times for DR applications?

Sorry for having a rant, but things have to change! :rolleyes:
 
#32 ·
I just wanted to add my perspective on the waiting time - or at least: how I deal with it (and how I can't, lol).

My partner and I have always said: as long as they say "yes" and treat our case fairly, I don't care how long they take. I can wait years for a "yes". I can't wait a week for a "no" but let's just not think about that one yet. We are preparing for a 15 month wait just because we can. This makes it slightly more bearable I think.

Having said that, almost two months after applying now I seem to have run into a small issue with the waiting time. You see, I'm on Bridging Visa A and that means if I expect fifteen months, by the time I'd be able to see my family and friends in The Netherlands again it will have been 1,5 years. That is all good and well - I made my decision, I called the shot, I chose a life with my partner in Australia over my friends and family at home and I stand by that choice. I am happy.

But I guess in the light of one of my best friends soon giving birth to her first child (and that'll be the first time any of my friends has a baby) I guess I just got gloomy. She was a huge part of my life before we both met our partners and of course life is what it is and she is starting a family and I am starting over - but we keep in close touch. I won't be there when her daughter is born and at the rate of the waiting game for the visa I won't see her daughter until she's over 1 year old. I can't ask her to travel to Australia, 28 hour flight pregnant or with a baby - and I can't really go to DIAC and claim my friend having a healthy child is an emergency that requires Bridging Visa B.

I guess I just started realizing how bittersweet it really is. First I was like - HAH, I CAN'T even leave Australia now!... and now almost two months later it's sinking in. It may sound cruel - I don't miss my family and friends as much as I would miss my partner, I know I made the right call, but the whole "we'll take 15 months... and you can't go abroad even once unless someone's dying or dead" is a bit much for me.

Maybe last week just made me nostalgic. Three birthdays of people I used to see all the time (my dad, my roommate and my cat who now lives with a friend there), my friend getting ready to give birth... it felt kind of cruel in light of those things that I can't go see them at all unless I absolutely have to. I would think allowing people one two/three week exit-entry wouldn't hurt? But who am I.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KrystHell
#36 ·
Amen to that. I'm at that point where I'm on the exact same set of mind. It's really hard to think you have to put your life on hold for so long.
And like my husband said: "why do they eve need to tell us not to get out of the country? what difference does that make to the process?"
 
#33 ·
Hi Nelly -

Great post. One thing however - the grounds for requesting a BV-B don't have to be life & death - the key phrase is "substantial reason for travel".

I've included some language from DIAC's policy manual (PAM3) re: assessing the need to travel - I hope it might be of some help to you!

Best,

Mark Northam

From DIAC PAM3 re: BV-B, assessing the need to travel:

52 About the requirements

Clause 020.212(2), (3), (4) and (5) all require that the delegated officer must be satisfied that, at the time of application, the BVB applicant's reasons for wishing to leave and re-enter Australia (to travel) are substantial. The BVB applicant must continue to satisfy this requirement at the time of decision (020.221).

53 Substantial reason and genuine need for travel

The migration legislation does not define "substantial" in the BVB context. The ordinary dictionary meanings of "substantial" that are relevant in this context are "real", "actual", "important", "of real worth or value". Officers must bear in mind the above dictionary meanings of "substantial" and apply them in two ways to the assessment of the criterion:

• is the reason for wishing to travel substantial - that is, is it important, of real worth or value? and
• is the need to travel genuine - that is, is it real and actual?
It is departmental policy that both these aspects are assessed and satisfied. For example, if a person applied for a BVB on the basis that their parent was very sick they would have a substantial reason for wishing to travel. However, if an investigation of the department's systems indicated that the parent was in Australia there would not be an associated genuine need to leave Australia.

However, departmental policy should not be applied inflexibly and each application should be assessed on its individual merits.

54 Substantial reason for wishing to travel

A substantial reason for wishing to travel would include travel associated with the person's:

• employment, business or education - for example:
• attending work or study conferences
• participating in business negotiations or meetings
• undertaking academic research or presenting papers
• family, other relatives or other person important to the person - for example:
• visiting a seriously ill family member, relative or close friend
• attending the wedding, or other culturally important event, of a family member relative or close friend
• attending the funeral of a family member, relative or close friend
• substantive visa application - for example:
• undergoing medical treatment for an existing condition
• obtaining documentation needed to satisfy legal criteria
• resolving custody issues relating to a claimed family unit member
• travelling outside Australia for personal reasons (including having a holiday) because the processing or review of their substantive visa application has been protracted.
The above examples are given as a guide to the types of reasons that could be considered and are not exhaustive. Officers must use their judgment when deciding if they are satisfied that the person's reasons for wishing to travel are substantial and document the reasons for their decision.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top