Family vists/visa question
 

If members of my family were to vist us in Oz, say on a three or six month visa, then how long after they return to the UK will they be able to apply for a new visa and be allowed to come back to Oz. Is there a set time limit in between visits?

Hope you understand my question? http://67.18.37.15/html/emoticons/wink.gif

Rob

Re: Family vists/visa question
 

Dear Rob

There is no set time-limit, but DIMIA look askance at people whothey feel are abusing the tourist-visa system to to try to live in Australia, in effect, rather than genuinely "just visiting."

The worst-case scenario is that someone could arrive on a flight from London, the immi officer at the airport in Aus gets suspicious of their claims to be tourists, and in an extreme case, they would not be allowed to enter Australia and would be sent home on the same plane they arrived on.

For this reason, airlines won't normally carry people who have a seemingly-valid tourist visa UNLESS they also have a return ticket, so that the airline does not get saddled with the cost of repatriation, which it otherwise could be.

Having said that, though, I've never heard of an instance of it happening in a genuinely "family visit" situation. After all, DIMIA has one of the most powerful computer systems in the world, so it ought to be possible for them to check their records when they receive an application, and if they choose to grant another visitor/tourist-visa, I think it would be very difficult for them to renege on it afterwards. If they become suspicious, there is no reason why they cannot query the request PRIOR to deciding whether to grant the visa or not.

However, I wouldn't recommend frequent and repeated ETAs, because the flights are both expensive and tiring, as you know. If what is wanted is a tourist-visit that will last for more than 3 months, DIMIA has the machinery to grant it.

So if, say, your parents wanted to visit you for 6 -12 months, look at the website for the Australian High Commission in London and click on visas and citizenship. You can download Form 48R from that, and if your visitor is over 70, you can also download the Medical Certificate there too.

For more info about all this, please see the thread started by the Foster Clan asking about medication and something else. They want their parents to go out to Oz for an extended visit, and the info I have given them - based on our own family's long experience with this one - might help you as well. (The stuff about medication may not be relevant to you but the rest is.)

Cheers

Gill

Re: Family vists/visa question
 

Thanks Gill,

My wife's mother would like to come and go as she pleases, or as long as the DIMIA will let her. I think initially she would like to come out for around 5-6 months, then perhaps fly back to the uk for a couple of months, then 5-6 months in Oz...so and so forth.

We have applied for a visa for her for a stay longer than 6 months initially but i guess we will have to wait and see what the response is from the DIMIA.

Oh, by the way, she is financially dependant which helps :D

Rob

Re: Family vists/visa question
 

Dear Rob

I hope you don't mean that your mother in law is "financially dependent" on you, my friend! I think you could find that that notion would upset DIMIA big-style, so I am sure you meant "independent." The way DIMIA look at it, if you want to be a "tourist" in Australia for 6 months or more,on a visa which specifically prohibits you from working, then plainly, you must be able to support yourself financially throughout your visit. Any other idea is inconsistent with the notion of "tourism."

So we are quite sure that your m-in-l is a lady of independent means, aren't we?! If you read the checklist at the end of Form 48R, you will note that they ask for evidence that m-in-l can support herself financially throughout the duration of her proposed stay in Australia. By which they mean recent bank statements, building society account books or whatever.

You don't say how old your m-in-l is. If she is under 70, and it is her first long-term tourist-visa, you might well find that DIMIA are quite generous.

My own policy with them has always been to write to them, explaining what I want on Mum's behalf and why. If they can see that one's reasons are cogent, clearly genuine and make sense,I have always found their staff to be willing to bend over backwards to accommodate Mum's wishes as much as their Law will allow.

My Mum (aged 85) is back out there for 8 unbroken months at the minute. That is what I asked for, they could see that my reasons for asking for it stacked up, and they granted the visa within 10 working days without asking a single question. Stony silence for a week and a half and then bingo, the visa one Saturday morning, giving Mum exactly what I had asked for.

I think much depends on m-in-l's age, and I agree that you might as well ask for 12 unbroken months (stress the word 'unbroken' in a covering letter) because the fee is about £35 whatever number of months that you ask for.

If m-in-l goes to Australia, loves it and decides that she wants to move out there permanently (as my own Mother does) then you enter a whole other arena called the Contributory Parent visa, about which you will find quite a lot on this site.

If your m-in-l is 70+, tourist and permanent visas are more complex but are still perfectly do-able. So if that is the case, please say and I can tell you more that would help, but I don't want to bore you with stuff that might not be relevant to you.

You'll be fine, and if I can help any further, I will. Just let me know.

Cheers

Gill

Re: Family vists/visa question
 

Rob

PS: DIMIA's policy is that they will consider anything you want to tell them at any time prior to their making a decision. If you look on the London website, you will find that you or m-in-l can e-mail them on firstenquiries@something or other. One is allowed to write a letter in support of the application, and my experience is that they will pay close heed to it.

Gill

Re: Family vists/visa question
 

Thanks Gill

Rob

Re: Family vists/visa question
 

There is a lot of urban mythology about the requirement for a return ticket, some of it believed by airlines, unfortunately. As far as DIMIA is concerned, a return ticket is not a legal requirement for tourists however if you don't have one and they ask, you'll need to be able to explain why not.

As long as the airline complies with DIMIA's regulations, as far as I know they are not liable for repatriating someone refused entry.

And if an immigration officer looks at his screen and sees you are spending most of your time in Australia as a tourist, a return ticket will not necessarily impress him or her very much.


Jeremy

Re: Family vists/visa question
 

JAJ

You could well be right that the airline would not necessarily have to bear the cost of repatriation per se, but it is either that or pay a very hefty fine for taking person to Oz in the first place, so it is as broad as it is long.

Here in the UK there is an immense problem at present with illegal migrants stowing away on lorries, yachts etc coming into the UK, and if these stowaways are caught, there is a strict-liability fine of £2,000 for the unwitting carrier. Whether or not the lorry-company or yacht-owner was aware of the stowaway is irrelevant. Australia has imposed a similar rule, and since the fine is higher than an air-fare, the airlines are not wrong in insisting on a return ticket instead, to cover themselves.

One airline (who had better remain nameless) told me in Dec 2005 that the "only possible" tourist-visa for Oz is an ETA. This was by way of explaining why their website refused to entertain the idea of a return flight more than 90 days after the Australia-bound journey,when I rang them because I couldn't get their on-line booking thing to work. So to this extent, I do agree with you and there are some daft myths around, which appear to be international myths, since the airline concerned was neither Quantas or BA. Singapore Airlines made no such daft fuss, so Mum travelled with them instead.

I also agree that the DIMIA officer gazing at screen can soon form an opinion about whether genuine tourism is involved. However, he does NOT have to wait for his colleague at the Australian airport to do it for him or instead of him. He can do it up-front, when Form 48R hits his desk, and neither the MRT or the Court would be sympathetic to the idea that our hypothetical man on the pre-grant desk did not bother to be thorough himself, instead of dozily booting the problem down the line to the airport colleague, methinks!

Gill

Re: Family vists/visa question
 

I think that the point about airlines being fined and/or bearing the cost of repatriation is that it is whether or not they have adhered to the rules that is relevant - i.e. if a person appears to the airline, after due checking, to be admissible (i.e. has valid papers and fulfils whatever other criteria are in place), then the airline will not be held responsible for carrying the person if he or she is in fact denied entry by the immigration officer. Obviously, this is not always a clear-cut area, however - hence airlines' keenness to err on the side of caution.

Indeed, airlines have complained in the past about some of the more arcane wording on several of the UK's immigration stamps, which, they maintain, are not always clear, especially to non-English-speaking airline staff. The Home Office has revised some of their wording partly for this reason. ("Leave to enter" and "leave to remain" still cause problems, however, since to most people with only limited knowledge of English the word "leave" means to depart and seems antithetical to "enter" and "remain" - of course, in this context it means "permission".)

(Stow-aways are a different matter, since the airline is responsible for their carriage, albeit unwittingly: they ought, of course, to know who is on board their plane.)

Re: Family vists/visa question
 

so what's this medical certificate for over 70's and would someone need it for just a short 1 to 2 month holiday?

Re: Family vists/visa question
 

The visa which Rob is interested in is a sub-class 676 (I think) which allows the applicant to ask for 3, 6 or 12 unbroken months in Australia (or you can specify how long you want to visit for - eg 8 or 10 months, for example.) This sub-class requires applicants of 70 or over to undergo a simple medical examination(which their own GP can do) irrespective of how long they want to stay for.

This sub-class is totally different from ETA visas, which you obtain over the Internet and allow a stay of up to 90 days in Australia.

I know nothing about ETAs because my mother has never had one, so I've never had to investigate how they work. I've vaguely heard that applicants above a certain age can't travel to Oz on ETAs, but I really don't know whether this is true or not. If there is an age limit for them, I don't know what age the cut-off point comes at. I believe that there is no need to undergo a medical if one intends to travel on an ETA, but again I am not sure.

You do not say which sort of tourist-visa you have in mind. The information about sub-class 676 visas is all on the website of the Australian High Commission in London. The information about ETAs seems to be on the main DIMIA website, which iswww.immi.gov.au

I suggest that you study both, and you should thereby be able to get some definite answer to your questions. I hope that by adding to this thread I might be able to prompt somebody with definite knowledge of the workings of ETA visas to respond to you.

Cheers

Gill

Re: Family vists/visa question
 

The airline would not be fined if a person arrived with a valid visa and DIMIA decided to refuse entry. A return ticket is not a legal requirement for Australia, to the best of my knowledge.

An arriving tourist visa holder must have an intention to depart Australia and sufficient funds to stay for the duration. A return ticket may help if questioned, it is however not a legal requirement.

Getting out of Australia would be the problem of the passenger in that circumstance. Most people will pay their own fare if the alternative is a detention centre.

Airlines are only fined if they breach their own obligations.

And if you think about it, a return ticket doesn't help the airline one jot as very few returns are flexible enough to deal with this circumstance.

There are some countries where a return ticket is a legal requirement - eg if you go to the U.S. on the *visa waiver* scheme (although not if you have a tourist visa) - but unfortunately a lot of people think these requirements exist for other countries when it is not always the case.


Jeremy

Re: Family vists/visa question
 

I am currently trying to obtain a 676 for my 79 year old mother. We move to Oz on the 17th March on a 139 visa and she is hopefully coming with us for 6 monthsand celebrating her 80th over there, because of her age we have had to get the medical done by her GP and gettinginsurance has been a nightmare. I have booked her flight but not insurance until I know she has the visa. I have 2 sister over there and one of them is comingback with mum for a holiday to avoid her flying alone.

Regards

M

Re: Family vists/visa question
 

M

Don't worry, my love! My mother is 85 now. If your Mum's GP said that he thinks your Mum is fit enough to fly to Australia and back "without assistance" then DIMIA will accept his opinion. Assistance doesn't mean family members travelling with her simply because you and your siblings are protective of Mum. It means medical assistance like the aircraft having to carry extra oxygen especially for her and suchlike.

I recently applied for a sub-class 676 visa for my mother. It arrived 9 working days after receipt by the Australian High Commission in London. If you get stuck, PM me and I will help you to sort it all out.

I'm sure it will all be OK. When did you despatch the application, and did you go through the checklist carefully and make sure you had included everything that they tell you to enclose?

Gill

Re: Family vists/visa question
 

I heard thru a friend of a friend that someone was on a 3mth, presumeably an eta, and had there vist extended another three months while onshore?

Is this possible?

Rob

Re: Family vists/visa question
 

Dear Rob

I have seen your new thread and I have seen Welsh Tony's reply. On your other thread, I have replied to WT, sending him the link for this thread.

I have no doubt that he has given you a technically accurate answer to the question you asked on the other thread, but I think Tony should see the context in which your original question was asked.

Because of the real aim here, as expressed by you on this thread, I'm not convinced that there isn't a more elegant solution than the one which has (presumably today) been suggested to you.

Also, are you sure that you understand the full implications of Condition 8503 -no further stay?

I am not criticising you in any way, my friend. Please understand that. I simply feel that it is better for you if we tell Tony the whole story, and see what he suggests once he is aware of the background context in which you have asked your new question.

I hope that he will read this old thread as well and if weare lucky, we might hear from him further on behalf of your Mum. I hope so, anyway.

If not, then perhaps JAJ can be persuaded to leave futile bickering with me aside (because, JAJ, if an airline declines to carry you unless you purchase a return ticket, then you get to stay where you don't want to be unless you comply!) and perhaps JAJ will advise us about whether your new idea is the best one for your Mum in ALL the circs for her and yourselves.

It is worth getting your new idea checked out in its proper context, instead of in isolation from it, in my view.

Sorry to be an interfering old bag, but what we want here is the BEST solution for your family, not the Kwik-Fix now which might not be the best idea in the long run. Condition 8503 has implications which you may not understand fully and so on.

All the best

Gill

Re: Family vists/visa question
 

There was a case in Australia not so long ago where some people (successfully) sued an airline that refused to board them onto an Australia bound flight for this reason.

The way to manage this risk is of course to get a confirmation *in writing* from the airline that a single ticket is ok, if this is what you want to do. And if one airline refuses to do business this way, find another one that's more open to the idea.


Jeremy

Re: Family vists/visa question
 

Thank you once again Gill as you have been so helpful.

All otions are currently being looked into although we have applied for a 676 visa initially.

Rob

Re: Family vists/visa question
 

I would have thought that you would have to purchase a return ticket on a 3 month stay regardless if you were thinking of extending your stay or not????

Any comments on this?

Thank you (again)

Rob

Re: Family vists/visa question
 

Dear JAJ

I am seriously intrigued by this! Can you give me the case-reference by any chance? I'd be interested to read the case if it was reported, because if Bloggs wants Option A but the airline refuses to offer anything except Option B, how did the dispute get into the Court in the first place? Did Bloggs buy the return ticket but then sue for misrepresentation or something? Also, what gave the Australian Court jurisdiction to intervene? Was the ticket bought in Australia? Alternatively,was Quantas the airline? I guess their terms & conditions might be governed by Australian Law, but Cathay Pacific, say,wouldn't be interested in granting jurisdiction to the Australian Court, I wouldn't have thought, when it comes to jurisdiction over the purely contractual provisions (ie not the international stuff that limits the carrier's liability in the event of a crash.)

I dealt with a not dissimilar situation on Christmas Eve 2004, hence my interest in what you have said. The airline was not Quantas or Cathay. For some reason, Mum had arrived in the UK on the outbound portion of a return ticket bought in Australia. Her new tourist-visa arrived on Dec 17, and we always buy fully-flexi tickets for Mum, so that we can change her flights at short notice if need be.

The visa having arrived, she rang the airline to settle the details of her return flight to Oz. (I agree with you that this had nothing to do with DIMIA.) The airline mucked us about something wicked! The date was agreed as January 8th 2005 and all seemed well until Friday 24th December.

That morning, the airline rang Mum, asking to talk to me. I was out doing last minute Christmas shopping. Eventually, I managed to get the airline woman on the phone at 2pm. She said they could not carry Mum to Australia unless Mum bought a one-way ticket back to London from them first.

"Why not? This is not a DIMIA requirement," quoth I. The woman burbled about the conditions for ETAs. "It isn't an ETA visa." "It must be." "IT ISN'T! It is a paper visa, sealed into the passport, put there by the Australian High Commission in London. What are you on about, woman? I am telling you that Australia does NOT require this one-way ticket back to London." However, it seemed easier just to give the wretched woman what she wanted, so I bought the one way ticket over the phone and thought that would resolve this extraordinary nonsense.

She then rang me back about two hours later. "Your mother has not got a valid authority to enter Australia. We have checked on the Computer." "She HAS got a valid visa, whether or not the Computer reveals its existence." The next demand was that I had to get Mum's passport photocopied and fax it direct to their Man At The Airport. I can't remember his Job Title, but apparently he had the final say-so about whether or not to allow Mum to board their flight.

By the time the fax was sent it was 5pm, the shops were due to close at 5pm, and I still had not had time to buy all the last-minute perishables like milk, cream etc, ready for the long weekend ahead. Luckily the small local supermarket where I live stayed open for an extra 10 minutes to let me do that. By the time I got home and tried to ring the Man At The Airport, he had left for a week's Christmas holiday. An anxious week later, I managed to talk to him. He said the visa was fine, and that their main booking office in London had misunderstood the whole thing.

Quite honestly, I was so relieved that we hadn't been completely de-railed that I was not about to muddy the waters by demanding cancellation of the one-way ticket and a complete refund for it. Since it was a tourist-visa, Mum was going to return to the UK anyway when it expired, so it was pointless to bicker about the details of getting her home.

This Christmas, I tried to book a return flight for Mum with the same airline, because their cabin-service is brilliant. Their on-line computer thing said, "Not available" when I gave it a return date in August 2006. I rang them up. I was told, "An ETA is only valid for three months, so it is not possible to book a return flight more than 90 days after the outbound journey."

I could see that we were in for a repeat performance of 2004's pantomime, so I ended the call and booked Mum on Singapore Airlines instead. Their computer had no difficulty with what I wanted, and they didn't even ask about Mum's visa, plus they were only £25 more than the first lot. Money very well-spent, in my view! I don't know what would have happened if I had booked a one-way ticket, because that wasn't what we wanted this time around.

The other lot had told me categorically that Mum would not be allowed to enter Australia unless she could produce evidence of a return flight to London, and that they would be heavily-fined if they carried her to Australia without a ticket out of the place at the end of the authorised visit. They insisted that this is what Australian Law says. I was sceptical, because the funds with which to buy the ticket, plus the passenger's unblemished visa-history, are better evidence of bona fides than a paper ticket that can be redeemed for cash, in my view, but it is only a small point of Law. It is not practical or sensible for an old dear who simply wants to spend time with her beloved grandchildren to get involved with suing anybody for the sake of the principles of Contract Law, obviously.

I quite agree with you that there are plenty of airlines to choose from, and what the tourist wants is a hassle-free deal out of them. As you suggest, I chose to find the practical route out of the problem in 2005, but the other airline had had us over a barrel in 2004. I wouldn't want to see anyone else having to put up with the same sort of nonsense that we had to endure.

Gill

Re: Family vists/visa question
 

A return ticket is cheaper than two one-way tickets, in my experience. Please see my post to JAJ. The return ticket in 2004 was about £750 from memory. The one-way ticket was £500. An absolute rip-off, but better than Mum fretting and making herself ill. JAJ may well be right about the legalities, but they are not of huge interest to elderly Mums, I suspect!

Cheers

Gill