Sm

Hi,

Does anyone know - can both types of parent visa application be applied for
onshore?

If so, what's the point in applying for a Contributory - if a parent can sit
out the years on a bridging visa?

Also...what type of visa does a visitor have to have in order to make an
onshore application (ie. apart from not 8503) - will an ETA do the trick?


Thanks for your help.



Seb

JohnyC

I think you don't get medicare while on bridging visa, so multiply $350 (medical insurance) with 15years. You would probably pay a lot more.
I would also like to know about the type of visa for onshore application.
Actually I am also evaluating all the possibilities for my parents.
Also if you or someone wise have an idea of aged parents. I have heard that if we apply for our parents who are above 70 years, then they have to undergo more rigrous medical tests?

Thanks
Johny

Jaj

    >On Fri, 01 Aug 2003 13:57:59 +0000, JohnyC wrote:
    >Originally posted by Sm
    >> Hi,
    >> Does anyone know - can both types of parent visa application be
    >> applied for
    >> onshore?


I'm not sure what you are asking. You cannot legally apply for a
parent visa while having another type of parent visa application in
the system (what normally happens is that contributory parent
applicants withdraw any previous parent application at the same time
as they apply for the CP visa).

On the other hand, there are onshore and offshore variants of both the
contributory and standard parent visas. But you must be 'aged' to
apply successfully onshore, and if you arrive on an ETA with the
intention of applying onshore you can be refused entry.


    >> If so, what's the point in applying for a Contributory - if a
    >> parent can sit out the years on a bridging visa?

There are a number of issues with living in Australia long term on a
bridging visa this way, including:

- if their health declines over the years, they will be refused the
visa in the end
- if they fail the balance of family test at decision (eg if their
circumstances have changed), they will be refused
- you can't travel on a Bridging Visa A (you need a BV B)
- there are issues with health insurance (no medicare)
- no right to work even for a few hours per week
- time on a bridging visa won't count towards a resident return visa
or Australian citizenship.
- they are subject to FIRB restrictions in buying property.

You should get some good professional advice if you want to explore
this further. If you do plan a strategy like this it might be better
to at least have them come on retirement visas, which now have limited
work rights and include a travel facility.

    >> Also...what type of visa does a visitor have to have in order
    >> to make an
    >> onshore application (ie. apart from not 8503) - will an ETA do
    >> the trick?

Yes - but there is a risk of being refused entry and being stuck on
ETA conditions for many years is not a good idea.

Retirement visa would be a better option.


    >I think you don't get medicare while on bridging visa, so multiply $350
    >(medical insurance) with 15years. You would probably pay a lot more.
    >I would also like to know about the type of visa for onshore
    >application.
    >Actually I am also evaluating all the possibilities for my parents.
    >Also if you or someone wise have an idea of aged parents.


'Aged' parent is defined as qualifying for an Australian aged pension.
65 for men, between 60 and 65 for women depending on when they were
born. The onshore application will be refused if this requirement is
not met by the main applicant.


    >I have heard
    >that if we apply for our parents who are above 70 years, then they have
    >to undergo more rigrous medical tests?

This applies for some other types of visa. Health checks for the
permanent visa are the same as for any other type of visa - and the
point is that as we get older we are all more likely to fail the
health criteria. Not a problem once you have become a PR, a big
problem beforehand.

If you are contemplating sponsoring your parents and between you can
afford the contributory parent application charge, I'd say bite the
bullet and have them migrate while eligible. They'll then be full PRs
from the start and can become citizens in two years. Any other option
is going to be long-winded and with a higher risk of circumstances
causing refusal by the time a date of decision comes around.

If you have an existing parent visa application in the queue, then you
may want to wait the few years. It's a subject where you should get
professional advice.


Jeremy
This is not intended to be legal advice in any jurisdiction

Sm

Hi,

The new parent migration booklet doesn't seem to discriminate between
non-aged and aged parents or between contributory and non-contributory when
it comes to applying onshore.

Are you sure about that aged restriction?

From what you are saying, it sounds like you can actually do an onshore
application if you arrive on an ETA (and are aged), but you should only do
that if you arrive for holiday and love it so much you want to stay - you
shouldn't come here with the intention of staying.

When I did a spouse app, I followed the spirit of that kind of rule, and
arrived to find out that not many people seemed to: it was very frustrating
to find other people with their partners on bridging visas, able to work and
start life, whilst mine stayed abroad and then came down on an ETA for a
while before having to hop to NZ to pick up the real visa.

Any idea how long the non-contributory queue is for an Australian Citizen
sponsored app, with all children in Australia?

Thanks.


Seb




"JAJ" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
    > >On Fri, 01 Aug 2003 13:57:59 +0000, JohnyC
wrote:
    > >
    > >Originally posted by Sm
    > >
    > >> Hi,
    > >>
    > >> Does anyone know - can both types of parent visa application be
    > >> applied for
    > >> onshore?
    > >
    > I'm not sure what you are asking. You cannot legally apply for a
    > parent visa while having another type of parent visa application in
    > the system (what normally happens is that contributory parent
    > applicants withdraw any previous parent application at the same time
    > as they apply for the CP visa).
    > On the other hand, there are onshore and offshore variants of both the
    > contributory and standard parent visas. But you must be 'aged' to
    > apply successfully onshore, and if you arrive on an ETA with the
    > intention of applying onshore you can be refused entry.
    > >>
    > >
    > >> If so, what's the point in applying for a Contributory - if a
    > >> parent can sit out the years on a bridging visa?
    > There are a number of issues with living in Australia long term on a
    > bridging visa this way, including:
    > - if their health declines over the years, they will be refused the
    > visa in the end
    > - if they fail the balance of family test at decision (eg if their
    > circumstances have changed), they will be refused
    > - you can't travel on a Bridging Visa A (you need a BV B)
    > - there are issues with health insurance (no medicare)
    > - no right to work even for a few hours per week
    > - time on a bridging visa won't count towards a resident return visa
    > or Australian citizenship.
    > - they are subject to FIRB restrictions in buying property.
    > You should get some good professional advice if you want to explore
    > this further. If you do plan a strategy like this it might be better
    > to at least have them come on retirement visas, which now have limited
    > work rights and include a travel facility.
    > >
    > >>
    > >
    > >> Also...what type of visa does a visitor have to have in order
    > >> to make an
    > >
    > >> onshore application (ie. apart from not 8503) - will an ETA do
    > >> the trick?
    > Yes - but there is a risk of being refused entry and being stuck on
    > ETA conditions for many years is not a good idea.
    > Retirement visa would be a better option.
    > >
    > >I think you don't get medicare while on bridging visa, so multiply $350
    > >(medical insurance) with 15years. You would probably pay a lot more.
    > >
    > >I would also like to know about the type of visa for onshore
    > >application.
    > >
    > >Actually I am also evaluating all the possibilities for my parents.
    > >
    > >Also if you or someone wise have an idea of aged parents.
    > 'Aged' parent is defined as qualifying for an Australian aged pension.
    > 65 for men, between 60 and 65 for women depending on when they were
    > born. The onshore application will be refused if this requirement is
    > not met by the main applicant.
    > >I have heard
    > >that if we apply for our parents who are above 70 years, then they have
    > >to undergo more rigrous medical tests?
    > >
    > This applies for some other types of visa. Health checks for the
    > permanent visa are the same as for any other type of visa - and the
    > point is that as we get older we are all more likely to fail the
    > health criteria. Not a problem once you have become a PR, a big
    > problem beforehand.
    > If you are contemplating sponsoring your parents and between you can
    > afford the contributory parent application charge, I'd say bite the
    > bullet and have them migrate while eligible. They'll then be full PRs
    > from the start and can become citizens in two years. Any other option
    > is going to be long-winded and with a higher risk of circumstances
    > causing refusal by the time a date of decision comes around.
    > If you have an existing parent visa application in the queue, then you
    > may want to wait the few years. It's a subject where you should get
    > professional advice.
    > Jeremy
    > This is not intended to be legal advice in any jurisdiction

Jaj

    >On Sat, 2 Aug 2003 08:52:51 +1000, "SM" wrote:
    >Hi,
    >The new parent migration booklet doesn't seem to discriminate between
    >non-aged and aged parents or between contributory and non-contributory when
    >it comes to applying onshore.
    >Are you sure about that aged restriction?

Yes.

Have a look at page 10 of the (soft copy) July 2003 parent migration
booklet, and also the table on pages 8 and 9 (in the pdf file you have
to read the pages as if they were side by side).

If you're not aged and you apply for an aged parent visa, you'll get
refused.


    >From what you are saying, it sounds like you can actually do an onshore
    >application if you arrive on an ETA (and are aged), but you should only do
    >that if you arrive for holiday and love it so much you want to stay - you
    >shouldn't come here with the intention of staying.


Basically, yes.

On top of that, if you have a standard tourist visa with condition
8503 (which ETAs don't have) you cannot apply while in Australia for
any kind of parent visa, onshore or offshore.


    >When I did a spouse app, I followed the spirit of that kind of rule, and
    >arrived to find out that not many people seemed to: it was very frustrating
    >to find other people with their partners on bridging visas, able to work and
    >start life,

If they were on ETAs when they applied then their bridging visas won't
automatically have work rights.

Many people do get away with this stunt (coming on an ETA and applying
onshore). You don't see those that get turned away at the airport
however. Or those who accidentally overstay their visa and then find
their onshore application gets caught up with the Schedule 3
regulations (which normally lead to refusal). Or those who get into a
mess because they don't have a Bridging Visa B when they want to
travel (a BV A gives no return right). And so on.



    >whilst mine stayed abroad and then came down on an ETA for a
    >while before having to hop to NZ to pick up the real visa.
    >Any idea how long the non-contributory queue is for an Australian Citizen
    >sponsored app, with all children in Australia?

The fact that the sponsor is an Australian citizen and all children
are in Australia means slightly faster processing into the queue, but
makes little difference once the queue has been reached.

As for the queue itself, you can have a look at it here:
http://www.immi.gov.au/migration/family/parents/q2.htm

The queue will be shortened by the following happening to an
applicant:

- death of the applicant
- withdrawal of application (usually to transfer to the contributory
parent queue)
- applicants who reach decision stage and are refused because of
reasons including principally:
a. no longer meet balance of family test
b. declining health causing a problem with the health criteria
c. withdrawal of sponsorship
d. other reasons, including character, assurance of support problems,
onshore applicants leaving Australia before decision and not
returning, etc.
- applicants who are granted visas

The queue will at the same time be lengthened by new applicants, and
existing applications that get processed and placed in the queue.

You'll have to draw your own conclusions as to how long the standard
parent queue will take for someone applying now, but at the minimum
it's likely to be a good number of years. Things may get clearer
eventually as we find out how many in the existing onshore and
offshore queues have transferred to the contributory parent visa.
Once you do transfer, however, you can't recover your old queue place.

Jeremy
This is not intended to be legal advice in any jurisdiction

Sm

Jeremy

You are right - it's in the erratum from DIMA to correct it for the online
version. The original was fairly well wrong.

Regards,



Seb



"JAJ" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
    > >On Sat, 2 Aug 2003 08:52:51 +1000, "SM"
wrote:
    > >Hi,
    > >
    > >The new parent migration booklet doesn't seem to discriminate between
    > >non-aged and aged parents or between contributory and non-contributory
when
    > >it comes to applying onshore.
    > >
    > >Are you sure about that aged restriction?
    > Yes.
    > Have a look at page 10 of the (soft copy) July 2003 parent migration
    > booklet, and also the table on pages 8 and 9 (in the pdf file you have
    > to read the pages as if they were side by side).
    > If you're not aged and you apply for an aged parent visa, you'll get
    > refused.
    > >
    > >From what you are saying, it sounds like you can actually do an onshore
    > >application if you arrive on an ETA (and are aged), but you should only
do
    > >that if you arrive for holiday and love it so much you want to stay - you
    > >shouldn't come here with the intention of staying.
    > Basically, yes.
    > On top of that, if you have a standard tourist visa with condition
    > 8503 (which ETAs don't have) you cannot apply while in Australia for
    > any kind of parent visa, onshore or offshore.
    > >
    > >When I did a spouse app, I followed the spirit of that kind of rule, and
    > >arrived to find out that not many people seemed to: it was very
frustrating
    > >to find other people with their partners on bridging visas, able to work
and
    > >start life,
    > If they were on ETAs when they applied then their bridging visas won't
    > automatically have work rights.
    > Many people do get away with this stunt (coming on an ETA and applying
    > onshore). You don't see those that get turned away at the airport
    > however. Or those who accidentally overstay their visa and then find
    > their onshore application gets caught up with the Schedule 3
    > regulations (which normally lead to refusal). Or those who get into a
    > mess because they don't have a Bridging Visa B when they want to
    > travel (a BV A gives no return right). And so on.
    > >whilst mine stayed abroad and then came down on an ETA for a
    > >while before having to hop to NZ to pick up the real visa.
    > >
    > >Any idea how long the non-contributory queue is for an Australian Citizen
    > >sponsored app, with all children in Australia?
    > The fact that the sponsor is an Australian citizen and all children
    > are in Australia means slightly faster processing into the queue, but
    > makes little difference once the queue has been reached.
    > As for the queue itself, you can have a look at it here:
    > http://www.immi.gov.au/migration/family/parents/q2.htm
    > The queue will be shortened by the following happening to an
    > applicant:
    > - death of the applicant
    > - withdrawal of application (usually to transfer to the contributory
    > parent queue)
    > - applicants who reach decision stage and are refused because of
    > reasons including principally:
    > a. no longer meet balance of family test
    > b. declining health causing a problem with the health criteria
    > c. withdrawal of sponsorship
    > d. other reasons, including character, assurance of support problems,
    > onshore applicants leaving Australia before decision and not
    > returning, etc.
    > - applicants who are granted visas
    > The queue will at the same time be lengthened by new applicants, and
    > existing applications that get processed and placed in the queue.
    > You'll have to draw your own conclusions as to how long the standard
    > parent queue will take for someone applying now, but at the minimum
    > it's likely to be a good number of years. Things may get clearer
    > eventually as we find out how many in the existing onshore and
    > offshore queues have transferred to the contributory parent visa.
    > Once you do transfer, however, you can't recover your old queue place.
    > Jeremy
    > This is not intended to be legal advice in any jurisdiction

ptlabs

Seb,

It won't be the first time DIMIA's booklets are wrong. The most reliable source of information are the Migration Act, Migration Regulations, PAMs and MSIs, which usually make bad reading for the general public, unfortunately.


Peter