BritInParis

Just completed a new eVisitor application myself and you are correct regarding the lack of questions on criminal convictions. It seems to have changed as there were questions regarding both health and character. Now it just states that you can only go forward with the application if haven't received a conviction resulting in a sentence of 12 months or more imprisonment and you are free of tuberculosis.

If the OP wanted to get something in writing concerning his or her criminal record then a Subject Access Request would be the way to go. Not sure it would be entirely necessary but as you say it may make the process at the border easier.

daftpunk2

Many thanks for the clarification.

SAR would be the easiest way forward, takes upto 40 days and costs £10. This would list the sentence imposed.

(The criminality question is still on ETA)

BritInParis

Agreed. An ACRO Police Certificate costs £45 and will likely only show 'No Live Trace' rather than the actual conviction and sentence.

spouse of scouse

BritinParis, thanks for letting us know about the changes to the character requirements.

Daft Punk, you would have received a nice post on this thread from me, now that I've read BiP's post - but I won't be doing so now due to the private message you sent me (below in italics).
I don't appreciate getting private messages like this, if you had something to say to me then this thread was the place to do it. BE is an open forum for a reason - if someone posts information that's been superseded or is incorrect, someone will clarify. I don't like being bullied and you won't have the opportunity again because I've blocked your user name, so won't be able to read anything you post or send.

<<<SNIP>>>

Bermudashorts

Daftpunk i am really not sure what exactly you are so upset about. Because other than is a particular question on a particular online form (big deal) there was absolutely no disagreement on this thread and there was nothing that would have misled the OP.

Jerseygirl

If you or anyone else receive an abusive PM or karma message please report it to the forum's mod, a super mod or admin. Thanks.

uktourist

Hi everyone,

Thanks for the help. I've tried logging in but forgot my password, the emails are super delayed from this site so it's taken 1.5 days to get the 3 separate emails, anyone else had that issue?

Anyway, thank you for all the insight in this thread. It seems the process has changed then.

Do I 100% apply for the subclass 651 eVisitor visa then? It seems so, I am just worried that there is such a large list of visas to apply for that I want to ensure this is right for the specific circumstance (i.e. criminal conviction, no prison sentence served suspended or otherwise)

It unnerves me that I do not mention the conviction whatsoever until I am on the plane and fill in a landing card. Is that definitely the case, is there no other way to advise them of this? At least if I had a visa approved having warned of a conviction (which seemingly according to replies used to be the case?) then I can expect a very minor delay if anything when I arrive.

This situation worries me as I will be spending a large amount of money on the flights and a 2 week trip, and if I only declare on a landing card who's to say they'll definitely let me in? At least with a US visa you declare beforehand, and seemingly the recent option for Aus I think i've read that as you declare at application then when you tick 'yes' to a conviction on the landing card they can simply see you declared that in your application anyway.

Final question, do I need to give exact dates for the trip? As I will only know about a month before maximum.

Apologies for all the questions but you can see this is concerning me!

BritInParis

Yes.

No.

There's no guarantee that any country bar your country of citizenship is going to let you in.

You don't need to give any dates of proposed travel for a subclass 651.

uktourist

OK thank you.

With regards to your third comment, are you saying that in general or specifically to me in my situation?

Is it worth speaking to an immigration lawyer to get advice, essentially facing a distressing interview/questioning upon landing having to tell me story start to finish (if they do this for everyone ticking 'yes') sounds horrendous. And having a chance of being refused entry after spending all that money, this system of not declaring until arrival seems very unusual.

BritInParis

That's a general comment. Any country other than your own can choose whether to admit someone or not.

If it bothers you that much then maybe you should reconsider your trip. An immigration adviser will simply charge you a lot of money to give you the same advice you have been given on this thread for free.

Australia's immigration system is set up to stop you from even boarding a flight to Australia if you are likely to be refused entry. As a British citizen providing you have a biometric passport then you can use the Smartgate and skip the immigration desk altogether. You'll then need to hand in your landing card and you may be asked a few questions about your conviction but this will probably take no more than thirty seconds.

Be polite, only answer the questions that you are asked, tell the truth and you'll be fine.

uktourist

I have been looking into this further.

The 651 visa seems to be free to apply for, and asks no questions about criminality or character. As per the above advice, it simply says you can apply if you haven't had a conviction resulting in a sentence of 12 months or more.

I've spoken to an immigration agent, who has said that if applying for the 600 visa then the process is different as you can declare a conviction upfront. Having tested the online form this evening, that is correct, all the questions are different and the visa is charged for. The last page asks you 'Has any applicant ever been convicted of an offence in any country (including any conviction which is now removed from official records)?'

If ticking yes a small box appears asking for details and I expect an agent would follow up afterwards to ask for the subject access form etc?

I would be more comfortable applying for the 600 visa where I can declare the conviction prior to the trip. However, the main question is what's the difference between the two if I am simply wanting to go on a 2 week holiday as a UK tourist? Why would I pay for the 600 visa when the 651 is free, and why would anyone with a conviction like mine go for that option?

Perhaps the answer is 'you wouldn't, so apply for the visitor 651' but the option is there and I'd feel more confident applying and declaring upfront. Baffles me why two options exist.

Silly question but I find this all very confusing.

BritInParis

If by 'agent' you mean a DIBP case officer then yes, they would ask you for a ACRO police certificate (£45), which would show 'No Live Trace' and so you would need to explain your conviction. Unlike a subclass 651 you would also need to show proof of funds, evidence that you are a Genuine Temporary Entrant (return flight, ties to your home country) amongst other things. Failure to provide these would result in a refusal even if you would have simply been auto-granted a subclass 651.

It's not that baffling - if you had been sentenced to 12 months or more or had health concerns then you would need to apply for a subclass 600. Likewise if you wish to visit Australia for more than three months at a time you would need to apply for a subclass 600. I think you've answered your own question however. Why waste (any more) time and money and actually increase the risk of a refusal unnecessarily?