TTTF

1 hour ago, Megrand1 said:

Guys, might be interesting

 

Looks a good spike up in numbers.. Could have been even better if they have not asked questions ! Positive out of this is the queue seems to be moving at a steady pace.. which is good news for the larger forum..

1 hour ago, Kaysavan said:

887

Applied on 03/03/19 

First contact from CO : 13/03/20 

CO: Judith, QLD

Was requested for PPC and functional English as both were expired. Updated my PPC today. 

I've raised a complaint on home affairs website and replied to my CO's mail saying that functional English should not be a requirement. 

I will also be calling the home affairs this afternoon to discuss and get more clarity on their request. 

I finished my bachelor degree in India and don't have a document that says medium of delivery was English.  

which state in India did you complete your education... It will worth to google the institution.. they normally would have curriculum which states the medium of english. 

33 minutes ago, Jessi said:

Thanks it looks fantastic hope it can be a eye opener 

Yeah.. lets c how it goes..

15 minutes ago, Summer said:

Case being handled by GSM Adelaide based on the email i received.

CO name is ANDREJ

Welcome to the club.. dont worry much.. Just do what is being asked for as of now to address the case. Rest actions can run parallel. 

52 minutes ago, Jessi said:

I had requested FOI from home affair regarding functional English is being asked from primary applicant of 887 let’s see what happens .I had also spoken to Mark from Migration Solution & he said he will raise the matter with ministers. I am planning to write to Ministers as well.Thats all I can think of doing till now.I request if anyone can help with wordings for letter to minister or any suggestion is of great help to me. At least I am not giving up.  

Great work.

You can consider adding few questions in your email, Talk more on English requirement rather than Inconsistency as it cannot be completely evidenced.

1. How can a applicant having a qualified level of English above functional level, gets no recognition in matter of three years? Provide a example of 'school and university' which  was mentioned earlier. 
2. Why are the educational certificates provided at the time of 489  not considered for decision making in 887 ? 
3. 887 is an extended pathway to 489 hence both applications and supporting documentation needs to be given equal weightage in terms of decision making for 887 visa application?
4. Why is the 887 checklist available on IMMI website specifically state this requirement, currently only talks about dependent applicants ? it will assist the applicants to put forward all the relevant documentation in one go and make the process seamless for decision making.

It is fair to say and understand  that the current legislation/regulations might not allow such flexibility, but don't you agree  Honourable Minister that it is worth considering revision to these requirements in long run to make the process more efficient and less time consuming .

Additionally I have personally noticed a degree of inconsistency of decision making by different processing centres. Although I do not have the liberty to know each case completely as the case officer but I am reasonably sure on the circumstances in terms of English requirement request does differ especially between Adelaide and Brisbane offices. You would be in a much better position to investigate this matter or ask for an explanation.  

Even you consider my case where I have secured a  higher level of English which is classed above  functional level and completed my education with English as a medium of instruction is still been asked to provide further evidence to prove functional english.  More than happy to support the case officer in decision making of my application, but this is something which is already available in my application of 489. 

Please treat my letter as feedback from the client for the existing processes, you would agree with me that client feedback is critical to make the processes in place effective and efficient. 

Even though I was made to submit additional documents which I have duly completed, my efforts are to make things easier for  case officers and future applicants particularly when most  of the services are restricted in the times of COVID-19, 

11 hours ago, Summer said:

Almost the same for me but with reason, 

What do you think? Any suggestion?

I hope the reply from CO after the email from IMMI hotline personnel will be favorable.

One more! Is yours case processed at Adelaide and case officer Lisa?

9 minutes ago, Scorpio2011 said:

Thanks Mate

My Ielts was expired at the time of 887 lodgement and my all qualifications were completed in India.

I am happy that my application was not considered for the above while Granting the PR but I don't understand on what basis, Primary applicants are being asked to prove their language ability by the Adelaide office. All processing Offices have same work process to follow.  

Mine was a similar case.. but was asked. Looks inconsistent approach clearly. 

QLD seems easy going and practical or I should say more experienced ppl.. as i  said earlier if there is direct grant,it leads to one version of the story  and other wise. 

Good on you mate.. enjoy. 

36 minutes ago, Jessi said:

So what you suggest how to go about it & what words can be used . If you can help me with that it would be a great help.

Firstly address the CO requirement I would say that is in greater interest of you and your family. I am sure you would have done that already.  Because you never know where this bureaucracy will lead to and whether will come with solution or not. Plus the time involved. 

Your letter should state your case and requirements at the point of application. why you feel it is unfair for a English evidence for applicant who has been already assessed  couple of years back. Eg. It is like asking university student did you complete your primary schooling.. 

I do understand everyone feels unjust ( I have received one)  with such stuff, but practically we have very limited information on most the topics and probably its the understanding we take from any information brought forward.Is it a right interpretation or not, it is not 100% there.

For most applicants functional english can be proven with some kind of existing documents, so probably address the issue in hand first and then go about finding the root cause and addressing it  is my suggestion. 

After so many months of action in media and various other forums the processing time got attention. It will not be a overnight change. 

Plus looks like COVID-19 is blessing in disguise,   as it has lead to a situation where department has to concentrate  onshore applications as there are very less offshore applications.  Many processing centres are processing only onshore applications which has also lead to reduced processing time.  Yes we seen occasions of inconsistency in processing of applications, but things are moving at a faster pace.

The objective is to get the grant and move on with life.. Whether you get a direct grant or a grant post answering a query should not matter.

Take it easy. Best wishes. 

2 minutes ago, AmitB said:

thanks .. i think this saved me...

https://immi.homeaffairs.gov.au/help-support/meeting-our-requirements/english-language/competent-english

11 minutes ago, AmitB said:

Does PTE also valid for 3 years ??


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

For aus immigration purposes it is valid for 3 years.

2 hours ago, Jessi said:

Should I mention that it’s an unfair treatment given to us & more of harassment . I wish to write following I will quote what home-affair website & legislation says.Should I point out that it had only happened to those who earlier had got 489 offshore & its only been asked by GSM Adelaide office specifically .

It certainly sounds as unfair.. But is it actually unfair in terms of law or relevant migration act? Needs to be revisited very  carefully before making a conclusion. 

These are very strong words - "unfair treatment given to us" & "more of harassment"  if not proven could backfire.

 Please remember prior you  write a letter/compliant based on the limited information  it will be difficult to understand and conclude  as each case has different circumstances.

Even you if you want to write it should start with a question and best way to do that is FOI in terms of having the facts right.

Hope this helps.

1 hour ago, Scorpio2011 said:

It seems true. Coz I have got my direct grant today from brisbane office. No Ielts was asked

Congrats for your grant.. Few things which needs to be considered thinking objectively are, 

1. Is your IELTS expired "on the date of 887 visa application", If yes you might be asked for functional english. IELTS - Update documentary evidence to prove FE. Remember IELTS for immigrations purposes is valid for three years. 
2. Education, Have completed in Australia or any English Speaking countries - If yes You might not be asked for functional english. If not probably consider updating FE evidence.

If your applications  is due to be considered revisit these questions, you might avoid the unnecessary trouble.

On the subject applications processed in states other than SA are not being asked, is really a suspense to live with. Only Immigration department can answer that. One would imagine the rules of processing remains consistent across the processing areas. 

32 minutes ago, Megrand1 said:

Feedback from DOHA

The Feedback Form enables us to respond to clients who provide us with suggestions, compliments and complaints about the service the department provides. As the matter you raise is a request, it is not possible for the Global Feedback Unit to assist you with this matter.

Hard luck, but nevertheless good try to seek answers. If one reads the migration act  closely it empowers the case officers to request for additional information  as per their determination.

This power supersedes of what is mentioned in the checklist or website. Once a applicant receives a request for additional information in most cases applicant need to provide it unless the case officer or superior decides otherwise.( bear mind to convenience the case officer will be long process which will involve time and energy)  It does not sound good, but that is how government bureaucracy operates. 

Global Feedback is legislated to only do limited things, they will never advise on the operational  matters or processes for the department. They do not have powers to do that., even if they find it is not correct. Hence you receives such standard responses.  

The case officers look at guidelines issued in (PAM) Procedure Advice Manual while assessing the case, one can subscribe it by paying the fees. Normally MARA agents have access to this. A free copy is available in selected state library  this will clarify things and answers most of the why's. If you need more clarity. 

In long run this needs to be changed, no doubt on that. 

24 minutes ago, Megrand1 said:

Guys who got stuck with bloody proof of English. I called Home Affairs right now and got a different response again. Now, they recommend to sit IELTS. Ridiculous

Inconsistency continues to be consistent. It might be a win  from all this at the end.. But somethings are not worth of your time and energy put into it. 

51 minutes ago, Hewitt Tan said:

I like to thank to this group for all the valuable information of 887 visa.

I received my grant this morning at 8.27am. My application information as below for your reference.

Applied: 21 March 2019

Granted: 19 May 2020 (Direct Grant)

Number of Applicant : 1

18 January 2019: Uploaded all required document

19 April 2020: Uploaded new police clearance for Australia and overseas

14 May 2020: Uploaded university certificate, academic transcript, enrollment letter and completion letter (Due to some COs request for English requirement in this forum)

18 May 2020: Uploaded my resume at 10.30pm

Smart Move! Congratulations. 

1 hour ago, Jessi said:

Please read migration regulation 1994 act.Every case officer need to abide by that . We can’t grab all the shit they are throwing on us .Moreover, the executive on the calls can give general interpretation of things as they are are not immigration lawyers neither Mara certified .

Best wishes with your application. 

43 minutes ago, Megrand1 said:

My friend what you put there doesn't make any sense.

It's 100% clear that only dependents should provide this. No other interpretation can be derived from the mentioned sentence.

Moreover, I called the immigration office today and they confirmed that primary applicant do not have to provide proof of English.

One of my friends had the same application as mine and he was granted without any proof of English for the main applicant.

It is not what I have put together... I am with you on the interpretation of what we see on immigration website. 

I just told the outcome of the call I had today.. interesting to know varied responses is received for the same query. 

One wants to be to 100% clear but given the current situation.. there is no clear answer here.

If one  gets a direct grant there is one version of the story and there is another when you dont get.  If the immigration makes it clear it will  help existing and future applicants. 

Best wishes with your application. 

1 hour ago, Jessi said:

Just a sudden there is nowhere mentioned that primary applicant is required to demonstrate functional English . Only GSM Adelaide is asking for it .

I also was under the impression until I had a call with the immigration helpline this afternoon. So basically the confusion is due to this statement, 

"Provide proof that all dependent applicants aged 18 years and older, who did not pay the second instalment of the visa application charge at provisional stage, have at least functional English." 

In the sections Step by Step refer to Step 2, as per immigration the bullet points applies to all the applicants and they have specifically mentioned dependent to assist. 

They agreed the reqruiement should be more specific. 

They see that checklist reqruiement applying to all applicants  and in nutshell applicants primary and secondary both need to provide functional English evidence. 

Better to upload relevant documents before it is asked for. One more thing, If a case officer has asked it, then it needs to be submitted unless case officer decides otherwise. 

Hope this helps..

3 minutes ago, Jessi said:

I knew it you are 4th one including me who got this request from GSM Adelaide @Hans @Megrand1

Sad !  But certainly Not end of the world... 

1 minute ago, SJay said:

are you going to do IELTS? 

 

and am I able to ask whats the error with PCC?

No IELTs will be time consuming.. I will get it done by Uni letter.

PCC do not know what error. 

1 minute ago, SJay said:

what the efff.... why are they asking something which was not in the legislation. 

PCC thing looks genuine, there could be an error .. but English not sure.. anyways get on with it and address it. 

Lets not think too much... If you guys have chance update functional english document will be my advice.  

1 minute ago, Jessi said:

Sad.Is it from GSM Adelaide 

Yes  CO.Jennie

Asked for more information,

Date : 16/3/2019

Apparently it seems there was an error in one of the files  relating to my offshore PCC, they asked to resubmit it again. 

and 

English -  Evidence of your functional English language ability for Primary Applicant 

My IELTS was expired at the time of 887 application. 

20 minutes ago, Salman khan said:

DIRECT GRANT 

APPLIED 15 march 2019

recently PCC UPDATED 

AFP UPDATED 

WIFE IELTS UPDATED FOR SECONDARY APPLICANT 

NO IELTS FOR ME 

CO NKHITA

Congratulations and Best wishes

13 minutes ago, CD-Waiting-For-PR said:

Guys

I am not sure whether I concluded correct or not based on my own experience and some recent document request of primary applicant English proof, but I think they are asking again to those people whose English exam result been expired when you applied for 887, etc more than 3 years after your IELTS exam

Like in my case, I have submitted Dec 2015 result at the time of 489. When I applied for 887 in march 19, it's more than 3 years. I never submitted my IELTS again, so seems like they must checked my 489 docs, same like above person.

Please let us know about situation who has been asked for IELTS for primary applicant. Also please clarify if anyone has same situation, but still they have been granted.

So we can understand their logic behind it and it will be useful for future applicants

Thanks

This is could be one of the potential reasons. Its worth checking for all current and future applicants in terms of expiry of 3 year period of English exam result. 

Again, we all only have limited information on what the applicants are informing us via this forum.But still a point to consider. 

Other option is start raising complaints around this, stating the link to departmental website which states no such reqruiement and  especially during these times to get a letter from university or college will be cumbersome process based in any country. 

one of the applicant has already raised a complaint in his response.

Hope for the best.