Originally Posted by Mrs & Mrs T
Mum can't do anything at the moment because, as yet, she does not meet the Balance of Family test for Parent migration. You say that she has 4 children, only one of whom lives in Australia as yet. The Balance of Family Test requires that at least 50% of the children must be "lawfully and permanently resident in Australia."
You are the child who is crucial to enabling Mum to meet the Balance of Family test. You will become "lawfully and permanently resident" once you move to Oz on your sc 176 visa with the intention of making Australia your only or main home. Your present plans say that this will happen sometime during Spring 2012.
Once Mum meets the Balance of Family test, you will then have to decide whether she should simply apply for an ordinary Contributory Parent visa, subclass 143 or 173 - there is a choice of 2 possible visas - or whether she should go to Australia and then launch an application either for a Contributory Aged Parent visa or the non-contributory subclass 804 Aged Parent visa, which is the main subject of this thread. What she will choose really depends on how much she can afford and how she feels about the possible options.
Contributory Parent visas are very expensive. If you think in terms of about £25,000 sterling, you won't be far wrong on the likely costs for a CPV or a CAPV for your mother. If she can afford that and wants to do it, it would take around 4-6 months for an onshore CAPV application to be processed and about 12 months if she chooses the offshore CPV option instead. If she applies for an offshore CPV, she would be able to visit Oz on a long stay subclass 676 Tourist visa during the wait for it to be processed.
If she can't afford a CPV or a CAPV then at the moment, an application for a non-contributory, onshore, subclass 804 Aged Parent visa would be a possibility instead. It would take around 8 years for the visa application to be processed but Mum would be able to live in Australia, on a Bridging Visa, during the lengthy wait.
Right now, I'm sure that my burblings sound like complete double dutch to you! I also think it is very difficult to try to understand more than one visa at a time. Nothing can happen about Mum for the time being anyway, so I'd suggest the following game plan:
1. Reassure Mum that she will be able to stay close to you physically at all times. She will not be left in the UK on her own at any time unless she wants to be.
2. Then get your own visa application completed and granted.
3. After that, study all the stuff about Parent migration quietly over a period of maybe 6 months, to work out with Mum what the best option for her would be.
4. There is no reason why Mum shouldn't travel with you when you travel to Oz in Spring 2012. She could use either a short stay Visitor visa or a long stay Tourist visa for this purpose, so there is no problem there.
As you study all the visa bumph (all the links are at the start of this thread and on the DIAC website) I think that the best option for Mum will emerge soon enough.
My mother has a Contributory Parent subclass 143 visa, which is the offshore visa. She flew to Oz 3 weeks after we submitted her visa application and stayed in Oz till about a month before her CPV was granted. Mum was 84 at the time and her CO was most anxious about our plans to drag her back to the UK, assuring us that a week in somewhere like Singapore would be perfectly adequate instead for visa purposes. My sister and I ended up reassuring the CO that Mum was returning to the UK by our own choice, not because we didn't understand the alternatives. It suited Mum and ourselves for her to return to the UK because she has several rellies in the UK whom she would probably be seeing for the last time. Also, at her age we wanted her to have at least 2 months on the ground between the two long flights back from and then back to Australia.
Parent migration is completely different from skilled migration, by the way. The whole experience with DIAC is very different. The COs who process applications for skilled visas are under huge pressure so they have no time to consider any issues that are not directly related to the visa application. With Parent migration, the COs are under much less stress and they go out of their way to make friends with the family, to make sure that you get your own end of things right, and they really do guide the family through the final stages of the application, providing absolutely idiot-proof instructions about what they want you to do at each step. Mum's CO was like the Fairy Godmother. She couldn't possibly have shown any more concern about Mum's well-being than she did and she was most anxious to make the whole thing easy and stree-free for the whole family.
Last edited by Gollywobbler; 01-06-2011 at 07:26 AM.
Thanks Gill, you have given me some great information, iv emailed it to my mum but told her to read I when she's got the time to take it in.
At least now I know what we are looking at and a good place to start. We are reall excited about the next year for us and although my mum loves things where she is it will make a difference once we go and she already has areally good circle of friends in Victoria who she is wanting to see again. Shea been very lucky.
Gollywobbler, you are an asset to this forum. You really are.
I am hoping that my parents will be able to apply for a PC visa in about 4 years time. The question I have concerns the fees for the visa. At what point would they have to pay the visa fees? There are usually two tranches of fees, aren't there? My concern is their ability to come up with such a large sum of money. They both have good pensions and will get good money for their house, but only when they sell it, obviously. If they have to sell the house and live somewhere else for 18 months, it could present a bit of a problem.
Originally Posted by Squareman
Thanks very much for your kind words.
By "PC visa" I assume that you mean a Contributory Parent visa? I think you do but please shout if I'm wrong!
The fees for Contributory Parent visas consist of the 1st Instalment and the 2nd Instalment. The 1st Instalment is around $2,000 AUD and this covers both Parents in a couple. The 1st Instalment pays DIAC for the admin costs of processing the visa application.
The 2nd Instalment is the "big money." This is deemed to be a Contribution of 12.5% of the Parent's probable futire health care costs for the rest of his/her life, so the 2nd Instalment is per Parent, not per couple. Paying it is the very last step in the process - usually 2-4 weeks before the visa is granted. It can't be paid until DIAC request it and they don't request it until everything else has been done and DIAC are certain that they will grant the visa once they have received the 2nd Instalment. Any other idea would be too messy.
I've heard that DIAC will be increasing the amount of the 1st Instalment by 15% with effect from 1st July 2011. Presumably they reckon that their processing costs have increased by this amount lately, since DIAC is a non profit making Government Department.
The amount of the 2nd Instalment - the notional Contribution - is calculated by the Australian Government Actuary each year. The AGA publishes the details though I don't understand the Composite Index. God knows what the calculations mean and I don't know whether it is possible to work it out from the face of the document alone but presumably the AGA understands it all!
The fees can't be increased without enabling legislation each year. That is usually passed on around 20th June each year so that the DIAC website can be amended as soon as it has turned 00:00 on 1st July and a new Form 9901 can be prepared and released at the same time.
The increases in the amount of the 2nd Instalment are not predictable, stable increases. This is because the AGA considers the amount that Health care has cost the Government and what it is predicted to cost for the next few years. In some recent years, the 2nd Instalment has only risen by 3.7%. Last year the increase was 10.6%. The only certainty is that it never goes down!
Therefore is it essential for your Parents to wait for another 4 years before they apply? My mother applied for her CPV in November 2005 so the 2nd Instalment for her was $27,850 AUD. Parents who have applied since 1st July 2010 will have to pay 2nd Instalments of $37,965 each. The Aussie $ is very strong against most other currencies and is likely to remain so for the foreseeable future, which doesn't help British parents because sterling is very weak and the Government wants it to remain so.
There has been a marked slackening of demand for CPVs lately - presumably because of the costs and the exchange rates. The financial pips are screaming, not just squeaking! Consequently the quota of CPVs will be 6,500 for the coming year instead of the 7,500 that it has been for the last couple of years.
I don't know whether the Government will couple that with ensuring that the rise in the 2nd Instalment will only be a modest amount in 2011/12. That said, if they soft-pedal for this coming year, all that will happen is that the amount will rise by less than the AGA would like. The Government will therefore impose a correspondingly large increase once the demand for the visas improves again.
Ergo, if it is possible to avoid waiting for another 4 years it might make sense to get on with it sooner rather than later?
Last edited by Gollywobbler; 02-06-2011 at 01:20 AM.
Thanks Gollywobbler, you have actually made my day! I have had sleepless nights about this issue, but it all makes sense now. This means that my parents would be able to sell their house and pay for the visa with the profits.
My parents can't apply any sooner due to the balance of family issue. I have a younger brother in the UK and a sister in South Africa, where my parents live. Our first step would be to get either my brother or sister (hopefully both) over here so that we can apply. The cost is frightening, given that the Rand is so weak against the dollar (R7.40 to USD$1 at the mo) but hopefully it will all be worth it.
My mother in law, however, will hopefully be joining us on the PCV, in the near future. I need to get my residence and wait around 18 months (I've heard the 2 year period is merely a guideline) and after that, we will apply for her to come over. She is a widow and has one son in South Africa, so she passes the Balance of Family.
Lastly, what is the difference between the PCV and the Temporary PCV?
Thanks again for everything
Originally Posted by Squareman
Yes, most Parents who apply for CPVs or CAPVs sell their houses in order to pay for the visas. The main thing is to market and sell the house early enough to be able to sure of being able to pay the 2nd Instalment when DIAC request it. Where there are problems with raising enough money for the 2nd Instalment, the Parents Visa Centre will grant an extension for a couple of months but they will not wait indefinitely for the visa applicants to produce the money.
It is a pain about the BoF Test but we were in a similar position with my own mother and there is just nothing you can do until the BoF Test has been met. (Except pray that the costs of a CPV won't rise too much during the enforced delay!)
With your M-i-L, if her application is to be Sponsored by you or your OH, there is usually no need to wait until the Sponsor has been living in Oz for as long as two years. The important thing is that the Sponsor must be a Permanent Resident of Australia and s/he must also be *settled* in Australia. Please read the two MRT cases which are cited by Alan Collett of Go Matilda in the very useful article that he published about this question:
The cases give one an idea of the sorts of evidence that would show that the Sponsor's lifestyle has become *settled.* Under Policy, when the Sponsor has lived in Oz for more than two years, DIAC will not normally need to see any specific, extra evidence that the Sponsor is settled.
When the Sponsor has lived in Oz for less than two years then it is important to produce the extra evidence and to include it in the bundle of documents submitted with the visa application, together with a letter explaining why you believe that DIAC should agree that the Sponsor is settled.
In their Checklist for the visa, DIAC list only the documents that they have to see as a minimum. However their Policy is that they will consider everything else that anybody wants to show them and tell them as well. It is merely up to the applicant to produce the extra information/evidence if s/he wants it to be considered.
I think that the main issue with your M-i-L and then your Parents will be the Assurance of Support. An individual Assurer is only able to Assure a maximum of two adults at any one time. The AoS period lasts for 10 years with a CPV. Therefore if you Assure your M-i-L, you would not be able to Assure both of your Parents as well.
It will be crucial to ensure that you will be able to make adequate AoS arrangements for all 3 of the visa applicants. The AoS scheme is administered by Centrelink on DIAC's behalf:
Up to 3 individuals can club together to provide an AoS but the Assurer(s) is/are means-tested.
Where Assuring somebody will prove to be difficult, I know of a Chinese gentleman in Sydney who says that he can arrange Assurances of Support on a commercial basis. From what I've seen of him - via the e-mails he sent to a CPV applicant who is a friend of mine - this Chinese gentleman is on the level. He understands the issues and I believe that he would be able to arrange an AoS - BUT he charges more than the $14,000 in the Bond in order to Assure a couple. He quoted $18,000 in fees alone to the couple I have mentioned.
I think that when the AoS will be a problem, the easiest thing is to use a company to provide the AoS. It can be a brand new company, purchased "off the shelf" and as far as I know the company does not need to trade in any way. Centrelink merely demand that the amount of the Bond must be $20,000 for a couple if a company is the Assurer rather than $14,000 for a couple. I don't know how much they demand if the company Assures a solo visa applicant, for whom the Bond would normally be $10,000.
The best thing might be to use a company to Assure M-i-L if necessary, so as to avoid using two different Assurers for your own Parents in due course.
Alan Collett is the expert on using a company as the Assurer because he has done it a few times recently for clients of his. He is a Chartered Accountant as well as a Registered Migration Agent, so Alan knows how to buy Aussie shelf companies and if the company's Objects need to be tweaked then he would be able to draft something suitable and to deal with filing the company's documents at the Aussie equivalent of Companies House etc. He's the man to ask if you get stuck with any of this!
Also, a PiA member called Wiggy Jiggy used a company to Assure her own Parents recently. She said that anyone who needs information about exactly how to do it is welcome to send her a Private Message:
I think it is great when somebody who has done something offers to help somebody else in this way.
Last edited by Gollywobbler; 03-06-2011 at 05:50 AM.
You really are an expert at all of this Gollywobbler!
In terms of the AOS, surely if my wife sponsors my mother in law, can I not sponsor MY parents? This is what two seperate migration agents have told me to be the case. I guess they would regard my wife and I as a unit in terms of income though, eh?
Failing that, I'll have to club in with my brother/sister who makes it over here. I'll also look at the company option for my MIL.
This is, again, amazingly useful advise and I thank you so much for your effort.
Originally Posted by Squareman
You are confusing two different things, with respect. The Sponsor and the Assurer of Support fulfil two completely different, separate legal roles.
The Sponsor is not means-tested but must be closely related to the Parent.
The Assurer is means-tested but need not be related to the Parent in any way at all.
It is not uncommon for the child to be the Sponsor and the Assurer of Support but in that event, the child is wearing two different legal hats.
There is no reason why either you or your wife should not Sponsor all 3 of your M-i-l and your own Parents.
However, your wife can only Assure two adults at a time and you can only Assure two adults at a time. We've got 3 parents to cater for here!
With some couples both spouses work and both earn enough to be able to Assure their respective Parents on their own, so she can Assure her parents and he can Assure his.
With other couples, Hubby is the main breadwinner and even if his wife works as well, she may not be earning enough to be able to provide an Assurance of Support on her own. Hubby might well be earning enough to be able to Assure his M-i-L plus both of his own Parents but he is not allowed to Assure more than two adults at a time.
The Assurance of Support lasts for 10 years with a CPV, which is why I am insisting that you MUST work out the sums - according to the examples given in the Social Security Guide - and work out who is going to do what when it comes to giving the AoS for 3 different adult Parents.
You need to be sure that the AoS will be OK before you submit the CPV applications for either M-i-L and/or your own Parents because although it is not impossible to sort things out at the last minute, it is cheaper not to use a company if another way can be found instead, and a last-minute headache often turns into a thumping migraine!
Don't go in search of stress, my friend, because stress can usually be relied on to make its own way to you - stress doesn't even need a map, in my experience of it!
Does this post make sense, please?
Earlier, you asked about the difference between the CPV 173 (temporary) and the CPV 143 (which grants Permanent Residence from day one.)
With the CPV 143, 100% of the Contribution is paid just before the visa is granted and the Assurance of Support is put into place shortly before that, including depositing the Bond. So there is a lot of cash to find at the end of the application process but once you've done it then the family need have no further involvement with DIAC.
With the CPV 173, only 60% of the Contribution is paid in return for the visa and there is no AoS, ergo no Bond either. The CPV 173 only lasts for 2 years, though. Within that 2 years, you MUST apply to upgrade to the CPV 143. To get the CPV 143, you pay the remaining 40% of the Contribution and you put the AoS into place, depositing the Bond as part of the AoS process. If the upgrade is not sought in time, you end up forfeiting the 60% already paid and if the Parents want a CPV at a later date, they will have to start the whole process all over again.
Sometimes there are tax-advantages in splitting the process into two stages, but the majority of Parents are not wealthy enough to need to be ultra-efficient about their tax arrangements.
Sometimes the idea is to get the temporary CPV and then save up in order to be able to provide the remainder of the money in time. I know one family who did this - it worked out OK but I felt that it was a very high-risk strategy.
Sometimes the Parent is ancient. There was an old dear from Devon, in England, who was 97 when her CPV 173 was granted. At that age, I might well suggest splitting the two stages because if the old dear popped her clogs within 2 years, the remaining money would never have had to be paid.
I wondered about this with my own mother because she was 84 at the time. Luckily, my sister said, "If there is a way just to do this as a one stop shop then that way would be preferable. Otherwise we'll just find ourselves stuffing around with this again in 18 months time." Elaine was 100% right. DIAC say cosily that there is a "shorter" application form for the upgrade. That depends on your definitions! It is something like 46 pages the first time and 37 pages for the upgrade!
We decided not to bother and just to get Mum the immediately-permanent CPV 143 and get rid of the visa headache once and for all. With hindsight, that really was much the best option for my own family. Only about 600 CPV 173s are granted each year, and about 5,900 CPV 143s. I think the vast majority do what we did, which was to conclude that it is not worth trying to hang on to the remaining money for a few measly months and that it is easier just to buy peace of mind the first time around and be done with it for good.
You do not save any time by trying to do this in two stages. DIAC deal with CPV applications according to the order of the date of receipt. Sorting out the AoS with Centrelink does not take long and sending 60% instead of 100% requires the same amount of effort from the applicant. It is not worth saving a couple of weeks if one is merely going to swop that for another 3-4 months of visa hassle at a later date, you would find. You get so sick of the visa process and all the hanging around that I was just heartily relieved once it was all over. I suspect that most other applicants and their children feel the same way!
Please shout if I have not expressed myself clearly enough. I'm in the UK, where it is Friday evening after a long and tiring week in the sweatshop that calls itself "gainful employment." My brain has been known to feel sharper than it does this evening!
Last edited by Gollywobbler; 03-06-2011 at 08:48 PM.
I spoke with my mum about the advise and information you gave me and one quick thing we were unsure on was, what it the 'Bridging visa'? Can you point me in the right directing to find information on it as it would really help and ensure my mum has all she needs to make the best decision.
I have not read all of this thread but would add this point if it has not been made before.
We decided to get a temporary Contributory Parents visa, which covers a 2 year period, and about half of the payment is made when the application is granted. The second half is paid when the full Visa is granted at the end of the 2 years.
This seemed like a good idea at the time, because it meant that half of the required sum was sitting in my bank account earning interest, (at least it was when we applied about 4 years ago) and only had to be paid at the later date.
It was quite straight forward, but we did have a few more forms to fill in to complete the permanent resident part.
One thing that did surprise us was that we then had to provide a bond of A$14000 as security. This should have been put up by our son, but he was unable to afford same, so we paid it to him to complete the bond. One good thing, this is in an interest bearing account paying about 6% for 5 years which we draw, and will have to be reinvested for another 5 years when the first runs out.
Hope this helps.