Guest james185

475 Visa - 1 year extension??

    Recommended Posts

    Guest james185

    Hi, I hope somebody can help or give us advice as we have just had a bit of a shock!

     

    My wife and I were granted our 475 regional sponsored visa for SA on July 16th 2009 (it has conditions that we live in Oz for 2 years and work for 12 months before applying for PR). We activated the visa in Jan 2010 on a 2 week reccie, we then returned to the UK and started a faimily with view to coming back to Australia 2 years into our visa (Jan 2012) and then applying for a one year extension to the visa so that we could meet the working/living criteria..

     

    I checked these plans with our immigration agent when the visa was granted and was told that they were fine and that the 1 year extension was a formality.

     

    I have just been checking that this 1 year extension is still valid but what I find is that for an extension you are granted a 487 visa which is valid for 4 years from the 'grant' date (which in our case is July 16th 2009) so if this is the case we would actually have to enter Australia before July 16th 2011 (3 months time) so that we could fulfil the criteria..

     

    The problem is that my wife is due to give birth to our 2nd child in mid September and we had been working towards the Jan 2012 date for moving so it has really thrown us!

     

    Has anyone got any experience of this? Is it possible to get a one year extension or is it the case that we actually have to go before July 16th this year??

     

    Any help or advice would be much appreciated.

     

    Thanks

    James

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Hi, I hope somebody can help or give us advice as we have just had a bit of a shock!

     

    My wife and I were granted our 475 regional sponsored visa for SA on July 16th 2009 (it has conditions that we live in Oz for 2 years and work for 12 months before applying for PR). We activated the visa in Jan 2010 on a 2 week reccie, we then returned to the UK and started a faimily with view to coming back to Australia 2 years into our visa (Jan 2012) and then applying for a one year extension to the visa so that we could meet the working/living criteria..

     

    I checked these plans with our immigration agent when the visa was granted and was told that they were fine and that the 1 year extension was a formality.

     

    I have just been checking that this 1 year extension is still valid but what I find is that for an extension you are granted a 487 visa which is valid for 4 years from the 'grant' date (which in our case is July 16th 2009) so if this is the case we would actually have to enter Australia before July 16th 2011 (3 months time) so that we could fulfil the criteria..

     

    The problem is that my wife is due to give birth to our 2nd child in mid September and we had been working towards the Jan 2012 date for moving so it has really thrown us!

     

    Has anyone got any experience of this? Is it possible to get a one year extension or is it the case that we actually have to go before July 16th this year??

     

    Any help or advice would be much appreciated.

     

    Thanks

    James

     

    Hi James

     

    I understand the problem but, like you, I am not sure about the answer.

     

    Have you asked the migration agent who acted for you originally? If yes, what does s/he say, please?

     

    Cheers

     

    Gill

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Guest james185

    I have two emails from two separate people at the agents we used (True Blue Migration who are based in WA) saying that out plans were fine to move in Jan 2012 (when we had a year left on our visa) and then apply for the year extension so that we could meet the 2 year living in Oz criteria.. I initially checked this soon after the visa was granted and then reconfirmed it last summer with another person (as our original agent had left the company) who also confirmed it was ok..

     

    I thought I would check again with True Blue yesterday to make double sure and the same person who had replied before confirming our plans were ok just sent me a link to the immigration website which gives details of switching from the 475 visa to the 487 visa (which is a 4 year visa from grant).. I have asked them to confirm but have yet to receive a reply, probably as it is the weekend..

     

    It has got me and my wife very worried though and I am pretty sure that the case is we now only have 3 months to get ourselves ready (tell family, rent/sell the house etc!!) instead of the 9 months we were advised by the agent that we could have..

     

    I will let you know their reply on Monday, but I think I know what the answer will be and I am not happy as we paid an agent specifically to guide us through the process and give us advice and in this case it looks like the advice we paid for was incorrect!

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Guest james185

    Below is the emails exchanged between myself and the agent last June:

     

    Hi James,

     

     

    Many thanks for your email. As the current legislation stands there will not be a problem with this as long as you have lived in Australia for at least 12 months then we can apply for the extension of the 12 months.

     

     

    Kind Regards

     

    On 9 June 2010 03:58:

    Hi

    I just wanted to double check that our plans are still valid, we activated our 475 SA state sponsored visa at the end of Jan 2010 (it has a requirement that we live in SA for 2 years and work for 12 months), we plan to move in early Jan 2012 to Adelaide when we will have a year left on our visa, we then plan to apply for the year extension so that we meet the 2 year minimum requirement of living in SA before applying for our permanent visas.. you don't forsee any problems with this plan do you?

     

    Thanks

    James

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Guest Nick11

    I think that once you validated this kind of visa..the clock is ticking.

    You have until jan 2013 to get your 887 visa..but if you use your 1 year extension you have to jan 2014 to get it.

    As you need to be here for 2 years in sa..the very very latest you can arrive here is jan 2012. I was under the assumption that the bridging visa kicked in when your 475 runs out.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Guest james185
    I think that once you validated this kind of visa..the clock is ticking.

    You have until jan 2013 to get your 887 visa..but if you use your 1 year extension you have to jan 2014 to get it.

    As you need to be here for 2 years in sa..the very very latest you can arrive here is jan 2012. I was under the assumption that the bridging visa kicked in when your 475 runs out.

     

    Hi

     

    I think the problem is that you can;t really get a one year extension.

     

    The problem seems to be the 887 visa (that we have to switch to if we need to extend our stay) is valid for 4 years from 'grant' which in our case was July 16th 2009.

    This 487 visa will expire on July 16th 2013.

     

    Our 475 visa is valid from 3 years from activation which in our case is from Jan 26th 2010, so if our 475 visa expires on Jan 26th 2013 we then switch to the 487 visa but as the 487 is 4 years from 'grant' then this will expire on July 16th 2013 not Jan 2014..

     

    So this means that we need to move in July this year so that we can fulfil the criteria of living in SA for 2 years minimum.

     

    Does this make sense?

     

    Thanks

    James

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Guest Nick11
    Hi

     

    I think the problem is that you can;t really get a one year extension.

     

    The problem seems to be the 887 visa (that we have to switch to if we need to extend our stay) is valid for 4 years from 'grant' which in our case was July 16th 2009.

    This 487 visa will expire on July 16th 2013.

     

    Our 475 visa is valid from 3 years from activation which in our case is from Jan 26th 2010, so if our 475 visa expires on Jan 26th 2013 we then switch to the 487 visa but as the 487 is 4 years from 'grant' then this will expire on July 16th 2013 not Jan 2014..

     

    So this means that we need to move in July this year so that we can fulfil the criteria of living in SA for 2 years minimum.

     

    Does this make sense?

     

    Thanks

    James

     

    Yes it does.

    What are you going to do?

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Guest james185

    Just going to wait until Monday to see what the agent replies and then go from there but I think we have to make some pretty big decisions over the next couple of weeks!!

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Hi James

     

    I think that under strict and normal circumstances, you could go out to Oz and apply for a sc 487 visa more or less whenever you like. Since you are the holder of a sc 475 visa, the only condition affecting your eligibilty for the grant of a sc 487 visa is that you have not breached the terms of your sc 475 visa.

     

    http://www.immi.gov.au/skilled/general-skilled-migration/487/existing-prov-visa-holders.htm

     

    If you haven't even been in Australia, you cannot possibly have breached the conditions of your sc 475 visa!

     

    However the sc 487 visa would expire on 16th July 2013 because the time is calculated from the date of the grant of your sc 475 visa, not from the date when you used it in order to make your Initial Entry to Oz.

     

    Which would mean - prima facie - that you would not be eligible for a sc 887 PR visa unless you reach Oz on or before around 2nd or 3rd August 2011. (The two weeks that you spent in Oz in January 2010 counts towards the residence requirement for the sc 887 visa, so you need to think in terms of 730 days in total.)

     

    However, this potential problem of the timing for a sc 887 visa would NOT affect your potential eligibility for a subclass 857 employer sponsored RSMS visa instead:

     

    http://www.immi.gov.au/skilled/skilled-workers/rsms/

     

    What occupation did you nominate for your sc 475 visa, please?

     

    How much post-qualification experience do you have in this occupation? (In other words, how employable are you realistically likely to be if you stick with the occupation that you nominated for the sc 475 visa?)

     

    Bear in mind that both the sc 475 visa and the sc 487 visa permit you to live and work in ANY part of Regional Australia. It does NOT have to be in SA even though they sponsored you. If you decide to go and live in, say, Cairns QLD, your only obligation would be that you would have to *notify* both of the State Governments involved, ie SA and QLD. Please note that the requirement is merely to "notify." You are not required to seek anyone's permission about this. So you would not necessarily have to confine your search for an able and willing RSMS employer to SA alone.

     

    I've also said that *prima facie* it appears that you would not be eligible for a sc 887 visa unless you have fulfilled the 2 years' of residence and at least one year of work by no later than 16th July 2013. However, I wonder whether there is any leeway on this?

     

    Your wife's pregnancy and therefore her inability to travel to Oz after about Week 34 of her pregnancy would normally attract some leeway based on "compelling and compassionate circumstances" if - IF - the wording of the legislation for the sc 887 visa permits any leeway and/or the legislative wording is woolly but the decided case law gives us some comfort.

     

    http://www.austlii.edu.au/forms/search1.html

     

    For the case law one needs to search AustLii above. I'm not a migration agent and although I am an English-qualified lawyer, I have had no formal training in Aussie Law. So although I can't find any relevant case law simply by searching AustLii, I do not know enough Aussie Immigration Law to know whether any of the decided cases on other visa subclasses would provide any comfort. One would need to be a qualified Aussie solicitor or barrister who also holds the distinction of being an Accredited Specialist in Immigration Law to be able to say anything definitive about this, I reckon.

     

    http://www.ddilawyers.com/directors_profiles.php

     

    Nigel Dobbie happens to be a mate of mine. He is an Accredited Specialist, has stacks of experience and has had some notable successes against the Minister for Immi in the various courts out in Oz. It follows that he knows what all of the relevant case-law says. Where there is no specific case law, so that whatever the court decides about a given situation would be new law, Nigel tends to have a very good instinct about what the Judges in the Aussie courts will permit. Some of his successes have made legal history in the field of Aussie Immi Law.

     

    So it is possible (but I'm not offering any guarantees) that there would be some leeway if you applied for a sc 887 visa in due course even if you had not completed 730 days with your feet on Aussie soil by the time you applied for the sc 887 visa. However you would have to ask Nigel or somebody of equal stature and calibre if you wanted a reliable and properly expert opinion about where you would be likely to stand.

     

    The irony is that Nigel doesn't charge any more than an ordinary migration agent with no legal qualifications at all would charge, but his advice is 10 times more likely to be accurate. Ordinary non-lawyer migration agents have no right of audience in the courts in Oz because they are not legal practitioners, plus they do not have to do any sort of academic legal training, so most of them can't analyse the case law any better than I could, and half of them don't even know the names of the cases that Nigel or one of his own ilk would look at.

     

    In your shoes, I'd be telling your migration agents that something that they allegedly discovered by phoning DIAC for an informal chat is far, far, far too glib and casual to be regarded as even quasi legal advice. Your whole future depends on this and it is up to them to obtain and to pay for some properly competent legal advice, since you allege that they seem to have provided potentially misleading and inaccurate advice in the first place, which you have relied on in good faith but possibly to your detriment. I would suggest that they consult Nigel Dobbie and if not Nigel himself then certainly nobody of any lesser stature than him.

     

    https://www.mara.gov.au/Consumer-Information/default.aspx

     

    If it turns out that the agents gave you inaccurate advice, you do have the option of making a formal complaint to the OMARA. Technically, the OMARA is separate from DIAC but in practice DIAC pay the salaries of the staff of the OMARA. Its CEO is Christine Sykes and her deputy is a guy called Stephen Wood, both of whom are long-standing employees of DIAC. I think that it is really only that some fairly stout Chinese Walls prevent the arrangement from being a mite incestuous.

     

    Migration agents are terrified of the OMARA. They have no power to order the agent to offer a refund but what they do do is to demand that the agent must provide chapter and verse in answer to the client's complaint. That takes up a huge amount of the agent's time so in practice they often try to settle the complaint against themselves by offering a full or partial refund of the fees.

     

    True Blue Migration was started by a lady called Maryanne Gruar and although she isn't a lawyer, she has been very successful. Her clients like her, trust her and on the whole she provides a very good service. Therefore in your shoes I'd contact her direct, by-passing her sidekicks, tell her that you are not happy and ask her what legal advice she is able to offer about the situation that you find yourself in. I would stress to her that what you want is called "legal advice," which cannot be obtained via Ms Gruar or one of her sidekicks having an informal chat with somebody at DIAC over the phone, bluntly.

     

    From everything I've heard about Maryanne Gruar, she does have a conscience and she would be mortified if her firm has let you down.

     

    https://www.mara.gov.au/agent/ARDetails.aspx?ud=1697&BackToSearch=True&FolderID=394

     

    Mmmm. Last time I heard of Ms Gruar, she was living in Perth but she seems to have moved to VIC since then, to judge from her MARA entry above.

     

    In summary, you may well have a realistic option of an RSMS visa if all else fails and you might have the option of some leeway with an sc 887 visa instead. Ms Gruar ought to know: is there a right to appeal to the MRT if DIAC refuse an application for a sc 887 visa? I am 99.9% sure that it is possible to appeal to the MRT (Migration Review Tribunal.)

     

    If so, that is quite valuable because it is a "merits review" body. If push comes to shove, they consider all of the circumstances that obtain on the day when they Hear the appeal, so they are often more inclined to grant some leeway than the decision makers at DIAC sometimes are. It would take about a year between lodging the Appeal and the Tribunal dealing with it, by which time you would have spent well over 730 days in Australia. (If you are entitled to appeal to the MRT and you do so, DIAC would give you a Bridging Visa to allow you to continue to live and work in Oz.)

     

    It could be the sort of situation where DIAC might feel constrained to refuse an application for a sc 887 visa but the MRT might take a more sympathetic line on Appeal. Which doesn't excuse the migration agents if they gave you inaccurate advice in the first place but it does mean that the situation may not be as bad as it seems right now.

     

    Please tell me about your occupation so that we can work out how good the chance would be of using an RSMS visa in order to side-step any hassle from DIAC?

     

    Meanwhile, please try not to worry because when there is a problem, there is often also a way round it.

     

    Cheers

     

    Gill

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Guest james185

    Hi Gill

     

    Thanks so much for writing such a detailed reply..

     

    For your info we applied for the 475 visa on wifes job as an Office Manager but now that she is a full time mum (we have a boy under 1 year old and another on the way in Sept) it would be me looking for employment initially, I work in sales for a distribution company so would be looking for a sales role of some sort.

     

    It is Maryanne at True Blue that I deal with and she replied today with the following:

     

    Thanks for your email. I spoke to immigration and discussed your case. It might be worth calling them to discuss this with them personally for reassurance . The 12 months would be from with the 487 is granted, as it takes six months ( currently ) to obtain then the time during this six months can not be counted towards the residency.

     

    I find this confusing as it contradicts what it says on the immigration website that the 487 visa is valid for 4 years from grant (which I take to mean as grant of our 475 visa which was on 16th July 2009)

     

    I am going to ring immigration myself tonight and have also asked Maryanne to confirm as I am worried that she is being given contradicting info from immigration who dont actually know the answer themselves.

     

    What I dont want to do is go on this info then find out a year or so down the line that it is incorrect and have nothing to back it up with.

     

    I will let you know how my conversation with immigration goes and what Maryanne comes back with.

     

    Thanks again for your help!

     

    James

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Hi Gill

     

    Thanks so much for writing such a detailed reply..

     

    For your info we applied for the 475 visa on wifes job as an Office Manager but now that she is a full time mum (we have a boy under 1 year old and another on the way in Sept) it would be me looking for employment initially, I work in sales for a distribution company so would be looking for a sales role of some sort.

     

    It is Maryanne at True Blue that I deal with and she replied today with the following:

     

    Thanks for your email. I spoke to immigration and discussed your case. It might be worth calling them to discuss this with them personally for reassurance . The 12 months would be from with the 487 is granted, as it takes six months ( currently ) to obtain then the time during this six months can not be counted towards the residency.

     

    I find this confusing as it contradicts what it says on the immigration website that the 487 visa is valid for 4 years from grant (which I take to mean as grant of our 475 visa which was on 16th July 2009)

     

    I am going to ring immigration myself tonight and have also asked Maryanne to confirm as I am worried that she is being given contradicting info from immigration who dont actually know the answer themselves.

     

    What I dont want to do is go on this info then find out a year or so down the line that it is incorrect and have nothing to back it up with.

     

    I will let you know how my conversation with immigration goes and what Maryanne comes back with.

     

    Thanks again for your help!

     

    James

     

    Hi James

     

    If you go to Oz on a sc 475 visa, that was obtained on the strength of your wife's occupation as an Office Manager then she is the one who will have to work full-time for at least 12 months, though if you want to upgrade to a sc 887 visa ir doesn't matter what sort of work she does for 12 months. There is no way round that so if necessary you would have to work part-time or not at all in order to look after the children, so that she can go out to work.

     

    If we forget about the idea of a sc 887 visa in due course and aim for the idea of an RSMS visa based on your occupation instead (which is a perfectly legitimate modus operandi) what sort of work are you hoping to be able to get, please? We need to ensure that whatever you might do is in Schedule 4 of the new SOL:

     

    http://www.immi.gov.au/skilled/_pdf/sol-schedule4.pdf

     

    Going back to the telephone conversation between your RMA and DIAC, the chances are that the agent spoke with a middle manager at DIAC. What question did the agent ask, though? If the question was whether or not you would be eligible to apply for an sc 487 visa, the answer is yes.

     

    However if the question was whether or not you would become eligible for a sc 887 visa even though you had run out of time in which to fulfil the residence requirement for the sc 887 visa, I wouldn't expect a middle manager to be able to answer that question accurately or adequately. The answer depends on what the PAMs say (the Policy documents) primarily, and migration agents are required to have access to exactly the same PAMs as the DIAC staff use. Ergo if the answer is in the PAMs, there is no need for an agent to ask anyone at DIAC about the answer to the question.

     

    It might be that there is some leeway on the residence period if the circumstances are extenuating (which the Aussies call "compelling and compassionate grounds" [for allowing some leeway.]) That is the sort of thing where the DIAC website would appear to be black & white and to suggest that there is no leeway because for 99% of people, there wouldn't be any extenuating circumstances either. However this might actually be more flexible than the website suggests - I don't know.

     

    In your situation, I would want more than a casual answer tossed off on the phone because such an answer is likely to be a wild guess that is not based on a sensible, intelligent examination of the legislation itself, the Policy documents if there is any relevant Policy about it and the case-law as well if there is any residual doubt.

     

    There are only 2 people whom I, personally, would ask about this. The first is Nigel Dobbie, whom I have mentioned. The other is George Lombard in Sydney:

     

    http://austimmigration.com.au/site/?q=node/1

     

    I've never known George to make a mistake with this sort of query. However he wouldn't get involved unless someone pays him and he wouldn't agree to deal with it at all when another RMA is already involved.

     

    Therefore I'd send Nigel an e-mail, taking advantage of the "free assessment" that he offers, and ask him what the answer to this question might be. He doesn't pussyfoot around with the idea that another RMA is already involved. Nigel runs some of the CPD courses and gives the lectures to other RMAs and aspiring RMAs. He has no problem with the fact that sometimes, one needs to bring in the Big Guns and ask them because one is not sure about it oneself. Nigel is one of the Big Guns.

     

    I'd be interested to hear what DIAC tell you. If they just say, "Yes, you'll be fine," I'd suggest pinning the person down and asking for the exact reference of the authority for that proposition, so that you can check it yourself. For instance, Paragraph 17.35.15 in the PAMs might be the paragragh that contains the reliable answer. I'd want to be able to double-check DIAC's advice, independently of their staff.

     

    Cheers

     

    Gill

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Guest james185

    Hi Gill

     

    I haven;t discussed the 887 visa with Maryanne only the 475 visa that we are on and switching to the 487 visa so that we can have the additional time in Australia to fulfil the criteria of living on Australia for 2 years and working for 1 year..

     

    I have had the below email from Maryanne a few hours ago answering questions I had put to her which sounds promising (her answers are in capitals) I am going to try and get this in writing from immigration.

     

    Hi Maryanne

     

    I tried calling immigration but they were closed, I will try again later tonight..

     

    Just to be clear I need the following points clarified as I am still very confused so need to know what your real take on this is:

     

    1) You say
    "You will receive the further 12 months from when you apply for the extension which would be in January 2013. Apply for the 487 visa currently can take approx 6 months which you will be on a bridging visa during this time. The time on the bridging visa does not count towards the residency requirement."

    So if the 12 months is from application in Jan 2013 and it takes 6 months on a bridging visa (which does not count towards residency requirement) to get the 487 visa then surely by the time we get the 487 there would only be 6 months left on it which would not be enough for us as we need a full year?

     

     

    YOU WILL BE GRANTED 12 MONTHS FROM WHEN THE 487 is APPROVED SO THE 6 MONTHS IS LIMBO REALY.

    2) The immigration clearly states that the 487 visa is valid for 4 years from grant, our grant date of our 475 visa was on 16th July 2009 so surely the 487 visa would then expire on July 16th 2013, and if we applied for this 487 visa at end of Jan 2013 then if it took 6 montsh to get it by the time it was granted it would have expired!?AGREED THE WORDING IS CONFUSING THE IMMIGRATION OFFICER CONFIRMED THE 12 MONTHS WOULD BE WHEN THE THE 487 IS APPROVED AND YOU CAN ONLY APPLY FOR THIS AT THE END OF YOUR 3 YEAR VISA WHICH IS JAN 2013 I WOULD ASK FOR IT IN WRITING.

     

    3) Then in your last email you say:
    "The 12 months would be from when the 487 is granted, as it takes six months ( currently ) to obtain then the time during this six months can not be counted towards the residency"

     

    This contradicts what it says on the immigration website as it says that the 487 is valid for 4 years from grant (which I guess in our case must be the grant date of our 475 visa 16th July 2009) but if what you say is correct then hopefully it is ok but would we then be able to work during the 6 months we were on the bridging visa? OF COURSE YOU CAN STILL WORK AND LIVE DURING THOSE SIX MONTHS IT JUST CAN COUNT TOWARD YOUR PR VISA RESIDENCY REQUIREMENT

     

    I am worried that the immigration department are giving contradicting information, how do we know that whoever we speak to actually knows what they are talking about and if we follow what they say it will actually be correct? I don't want to to move in Jan 2012 and then find out a year or so later that we can't actually get PR anyway.. is there any way of getting an answer in writing so we can be sure it is correct and they will stick to it?? I WOULD OBTAIN IT IN WRITING SO LODGE AN ONLINE FORM.

     

    As I say I will speak to immigration but please can you also clarify the points for me, I am sorry to be a pain but I am sure you can appreciate that we need to make double sure on everything. YOU ARE NOT A PAIN

     

     

    Thanks

    James

     

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Guest james185

    Hi Gill

     

    Just re-reading your email, it was my understanding that on a 475 visa it didn;t matter which one of us could work full time for 12 months to meet the requirements of the visa! I have just sent Maryanne another email to confirm this..

     

    Thanks

    James

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Hi Gill

     

    I haven;t discussed the 887 visa with Maryanne only the 475 visa that we are on and switching to the 487 visa so that we can have the additional time in Australia to fulfil the criteria of living on Australia for 2 years and working for 1 year..

     

    I have had the below email from Maryanne a few hours ago answering questions I had put to her which sounds promising (her answers are in capitals) I am going to try and get this in writing from immigration.

     

    Hi Maryanne

     

    I tried calling immigration but they were closed, I will try again later tonight..

     

    Just to be clear I need the following points clarified as I am still very confused so need to know what your real take on this is:

     

    1) You say
    "You will receive the further 12 months from when you apply for the extension which would be in January 2013. Apply for the 487 visa currently can take approx 6 months which you will be on a bridging visa during this time. The time on the bridging visa does not count towards the residency requirement."

     

    So if the 12 months is from application in Jan 2013 and it takes 6 months on a bridging visa (which does not count towards residency requirement) to get the 487 visa then surely by the time we get the 487 there would only be 6 months left on it which would not be enough for us as we need a full year?

     

    YOU WILL BE GRANTED 12 MONTHS FROM WHEN THE 487 is APPROVED SO THE 6 MONTHS IS LIMBO REALY.

    2) The immigration clearly states that the 487 visa is valid for 4 years from grant, our grant date of our 475 visa was on 16th July 2009 so surely the 487 visa would then expire on July 16th 2013, and if we applied for this 487 visa at end of Jan 2013 then if it took 6 montsh to get it by the time it was granted it would have expired!?AGREED THE WORDING IS CONFUSING THE IMMIGRATION OFFICER CONFIRMED THE 12 MONTHS WOULD BE WHEN THE THE 487 IS APPROVED AND YOU CAN ONLY APPLY FOR THIS AT THE END OF YOUR 3 YEAR VISA WHICH IS JAN 2013 I WOULD ASK FOR IT IN WRITING.

     

    3) Then in your last email you say:
    "The 12 months would be from when the 487 is granted, as it takes six months ( currently ) to obtain then the time during this six months can not be counted towards the residency"

     

    This contradicts what it says on the immigration website as it says that the 487 is valid for 4 years from grant (which I guess in our case must be the grant date of our 475 visa 16th July 2009) but if what you say is correct then hopefully it is ok but would we then be able to work during the 6 months we were on the bridging visa? OF COURSE YOU CAN STILL WORK AND LIVE DURING THOSE SIX MONTHS IT JUST CAN COUNT TOWARD YOUR PR VISA RESIDENCY REQUIREMENT

     

    I am worried that the immigration department are giving contradicting information, how do we know that whoever we speak to actually knows what they are talking about and if we follow what they say it will actually be correct? I don't want to to move in Jan 2012 and then find out a year or so later that we can't actually get PR anyway.. is there any way of getting an answer in writing so we can be sure it is correct and they will stick to it?? I WOULD OBTAIN IT IN WRITING SO LODGE AN ONLINE FORM.

     

    As I say I will speak to immigration but please can you also clarify the points for me, I am sorry to be a pain but I am sure you can appreciate that we need to make double sure on everything. YOU ARE NOT A PAIN

     

     

    Thanks

    James

     

     

    Hi James

     

    Mmmmmm. Since when has the proper interpretation of modern statute law depended on folklore that is passed around via the jungle drums?

     

    I would be distinctly underwhelmed if a Registered Migration Agent suggested that I should pay him/her to do nothing but make phone calls to DIAC's less than most senior members of staff. You can contact DIAC yourself if you want nothing better than that, so in what way would this RMA be "adding value" to the proceedings if you decided to enrich him or her?

     

    The DIAC website might be wrong about the sc 487 visa in this situation, but it definitely isn't "confusing." The sc 487 visa will expire on the 4th anniversary of the grant of the sc 475 visa, so it says:

     

    http://www.immi.gov.au/skilled/general-skilled-migration/487/existing-prov-visa-holders.htm

     

    So is the website inaccurate on this point?

     

    Maryanne seems to think that she has been given to understand (over the phone, the modern equivalent of the jungle drums) that the website is inaccurate and misleading about this.

     

    If she is right that the sc 487 visa would definitely allow a further 12 months in Australia then this must be confirmed somewhere in the PAMs. So why is she relying on phone calls instead of reading the PAMs? I can only assume that she does not want any further instructions from you regarding your visa affairs, which is unusual for an RMA, but still....

     

    However, she clearly doesn't have any ideas of her own about what the situation might be, so I think your best bet is to ask DIAC, as she suggests. Please let me know what they say?

     

    Cheers

     

    Gill

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Guest james185
    Hi James

     

    Mmmmmm. Since when has the proper interpretation of modern statute law depended on folklore that is passed around via the jungle drums?

     

    I would be distinctly underwhelmed if a Registered Migration Agent suggested that I should pay him/her to do nothing but make phone calls to DIAC's less than most senior members of staff. You can contact DIAC yourself if you want nothing better than that, so in what way would this RMA be "adding value" to the proceedings if you decided to enrich him or her?

     

    The DIAC website might be wrong about the sc 487 visa in this situation, but it definitely isn't "confusing." The sc 487 visa will expire on the 4th anniversary of the grant of the sc 475 visa, so it says:

     

    http://www.immi.gov.au/skilled/general-skilled-migration/487/existing-prov-visa-holders.htm

     

    So is the website inaccurate on this point?

     

    Maryanne seems to think that she has been given to understand (over the phone, the modern equivalent of the jungle drums) that the website is inaccurate and misleading about this.

     

    If she is right that the sc 487 visa would definitely allow a further 12 months in Australia then this must be confirmed somewhere in the PAMs. So why is she relying on phone calls instead of reading the PAMs? I can only assume that she does not want any further instructions from you regarding your visa affairs, which is unusual for an RMA, but still....

     

    However, she clearly doesn't have any ideas of her own about what the situation might be, so I think your best bet is to ask DIAC, as she suggests. Please let me know what they say?

     

    Cheers

     

    Gill

     

    Hi Gill

     

    As an update I heard back from Maryanne today after asking her to get confirmation in writing that we could get the full year extension on the 487 visa and she has now changed her tune and reverted back to what it says on the DIAC website which has really thrown us and also lost us another month!

     

    I have just emailed Nigel Dobbie as you recommended (i sent the email to nigel@ddilawyers.com which I hope is correct?) and a copy of my email is below so that you can see our predicament now.

     

     

    Hi Nigel

     

    I am from the UK and have been put in touch with you by Gill (who I know as Gollywobbler) from the Poms In Adelaide forum.

     

    I was hoping you could help me or offer some advice as my wife and I are in a bit of a predicament with our 475 SA State sponsored visa, I am obviously prepared to pay for your advide or services.

     

    As a bit of background my wife and I were granted our 475 SA State Sponsored Visa on July 16th 2009, we then activated it on 2nd Feb 2010 on a 2 week reccie to South Australia, we then returned to the UK and started a family, we have a baby boy who will be 1 year old on 30th May and another baby due on Sept 16th this year.

     

    The 475 visa was valid for 3 years from activation and (as I am sure you know) requires that we live in SA for 2 years and work for 1 year before applying for PR (887 visa).

     

    Our plan after activating this visa was to return to the UK, start a family and then move to Australia in Jan 2012 when we had 1 year left on our visa, we would then apply for the 1 year extension available on the 487 visa that would enable us to meet the 2 year living in SA requirement of the visa. We had this plan confirmed by our migration agent at the time Murray Shaw ofTrue Blue Migration of Rockingham WA, Murray Shaw left True Blue last year but I did check again with True Blue mid way through 2010 and had a reply from Maryanne Gruar that these plans were still fine.

     

    We are now approaching the time when we need to start thinking about our actual moving plans so last month I checked again with Maryanne Gruar that our plans were still fine, she again confirmed that they were but seems less convinced this time and rang DIAC, she then sent me an email a few days later saying that she had spoken to DIAC and been told that our plans were still fine, we should apply for the 487 visa in Jan 2013 when our 475 expired, we would then go onto a bridging visa for around 6 months (which would not contribute to our living/working requirements) and then we would transfer on to the 487 which would be valid for a full 12 months from grant.

     

    I asked Maryanne to get this in writing from DIAC as it seemed to contradict what I had read on the immigration website which said that the 487 was valid for 4 years from grant (so in our case would expired on July 16th 2013) meaning that we would actually need to make the move in July this year!

     

    I received a reply from Maryanne this morning saying the following:

     

    "I hope you are well, diac sent a generic response so I discussed your case with at a seminar on the weekend. The lawyer running the seminar did not know the answer either and none of the other Registered Migration Agents at the course have had this enquiry. To be honest you are the first 475 client through True Blue who looks like applying for this in theory most people activate and stay straight away.

     

    I have found a definite answer and it is not good for you guys. You will be granted 48 months from the date your visa was granted on a " Further visa 487". The date you visa was granted is the 16/07/2009 so the 48 would be issued until 16/07/2013."

    So basically Maryanne has changed what she had originally told us and now seems to be just going with what it says on the immigration website which is what I had flagged up with her previosuly and she had insisted was not actually the case.

    This puts us in a huge predicament, if what Maryanne now says is definitely correct then we have until July 16th 2011 (2 months time) to make the move, my wife would be due to give birth 2 months later in September and we have 2 months to sell the house, resign from jobs etc.. we are not sure if it is going to be possible and feel that we have been mis informed by True Blue and are extemely disappointed that we paid for the services of an agent who gave us wrong information and has possibly ruined our dream of moving to Australia.

    Please can you confirm what is actually correct?

    1) Can we make the move in Jan 2012 and apply for a an extension to our visa in Jan 2013 and be granted a full 12 months extension (487 visa) that Maryanne originally told us... or

    2) Would we have to move before July 16th 2011 and then in July 2012 apply for the 487 visa which would expire on July 16th 2013?

    I would really appreciate your help, I checked with Maryanne the situation mid April and it has only been because I have been pushing for written confirmation that we have now been told our original plans are not possible so now we have lost another month and time is really running out for us.

    If what we are now being told is correct and to fulfil the '2 year living in SA criteria' we would need to make the move in July 2011 is there any leeway with immigration due to the fact that we have started a family that we could apply for the 887 visa without fulfilling the 2 year criteria??

    Below is the link to the thread that contains my conversation with Gill who recommends your services and also asks the same question regarding any leeway being granted from DIAC.

    http://www.pomsinadelaide.com/forum/adelaide-migration-issues/23383-475-visa-1-year-extension.html

    Please let me know if you can help, ideally we would want to make the move as planned in Jan 2012 as it really does not give us enough time to move in July this year but we need some definitive answers as we seem to be getting contradicting info.

    Best regards

    James Mooney

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Hi Gill

     

    As an update I heard back from Maryanne today after asking her to get confirmation in writing that we could get the full year extension on the 487 visa and she has now changed her tune and reverted back to what it says on the DIAC website which has really thrown us and also lost us another month!

     

    I have just emailed Nigel Dobbie as you recommended (i sent the email to nigel@ddilawyers.com which I hope is correct?) and a copy of my email is below so that you can see our predicament now.

     

     

    Hi Nigel

     

    I am from the UK and have been put in touch with you by Gill (who I know as Gollywobbler) from the Poms In Adelaide forum.

     

    I was hoping you could help me or offer some advice as my wife and I are in a bit of a predicament with our 475 SA State sponsored visa, I am obviously prepared to pay for your advide or services.

     

    As a bit of background my wife and I were granted our 475 SA State Sponsored Visa on July 16th 2009, we then activated it on 2nd Feb 2010 on a 2 week reccie to South Australia, we then returned to the UK and started a family, we have a baby boy who will be 1 year old on 30th May and another baby due on Sept 16th this year.

     

    The 475 visa was valid for 3 years from activation and (as I am sure you know) requires that we live in SA for 2 years and work for 1 year before applying for PR (887 visa).

     

    Our plan after activating this visa was to return to the UK, start a family and then move to Australia in Jan 2012 when we had 1 year left on our visa, we would then apply for the 1 year extension available on the 487 visa that would enable us to meet the 2 year living in SA requirement of the visa. We had this plan confirmed by our migration agent at the time Murray Shaw ofTrue Blue Migration of Rockingham WA, Murray Shaw left True Blue last year but I did check again with True Blue mid way through 2010 and had a reply from Maryanne Gruar that these plans were still fine.

     

    We are now approaching the time when we need to start thinking about our actual moving plans so last month I checked again with Maryanne Gruar that our plans were still fine, she again confirmed that they were but seems less convinced this time and rang DIAC, she then sent me an email a few days later saying that she had spoken to DIAC and been told that our plans were still fine, we should apply for the 487 visa in Jan 2013 when our 475 expired, we would then go onto a bridging visa for around 6 months (which would not contribute to our living/working requirements) and then we would transfer on to the 487 which would be valid for a full 12 months from grant.

     

    I asked Maryanne to get this in writing from DIAC as it seemed to contradict what I had read on the immigration website which said that the 487 was valid for 4 years from grant (so in our case would expired on July 16th 2013) meaning that we would actually need to make the move in July this year!

     

    I received a reply from Maryanne this morning saying the following:

     

    "I hope you are well, diac sent a generic response so I discussed your case with at a seminar on the weekend. The lawyer running the seminar did not know the answer either and none of the other Registered Migration Agents at the course have had this enquiry. To be honest you are the first 475 client through True Blue who looks like applying for this in theory most people activate and stay straight away.

     

    I have found a definite answer and it is not good for you guys. You will be granted 48 months from the date your visa was granted on a " Further visa 487". The date you visa was granted is the 16/07/2009 so the 48 would be issued until 16/07/2013."

     

    So basically Maryanne has changed what she had originally told us and now seems to be just going with what it says on the immigration website which is what I had flagged up with her previosuly and she had insisted was not actually the case.

     

    This puts us in a huge predicament, if what Maryanne now says is definitely correct then we have until July 16th 2011 (2 months time) to make the move, my wife would be due to give birth 2 months later in September and we have 2 months to sell the house, resign from jobs etc.. we are not sure if it is going to be possible and feel that we have been mis informed by True Blue and are extemely disappointed that we paid for the services of an agent who gave us wrong information and has possibly ruined our dream of moving to Australia.

     

    Please can you confirm what is actually correct?

     

    1) Can we make the move in Jan 2012 and apply for a an extension to our visa in Jan 2013 and be granted a full 12 months extension (487 visa) that Maryanne originally told us... or

    2) Would we have to move before July 16th 2011 and then in July 2012 apply for the 487 visa which would expire on July 16th 2013?

     

    I would really appreciate your help, I checked with Maryanne the situation mid April and it has only been because I have been pushing for written confirmation that we have now been told our original plans are not possible so now we have lost another month and time is really running out for us.

     

    If what we are now being told is correct and to fulfil the '2 year living in SA criteria' we would need to make the move in July 2011 is there any leeway with immigration due to the fact that we have started a family that we could apply for the 887 visa without fulfilling the 2 year criteria??

     

    Below is the link to the thread that contains my conversation with Gill who recommends your services and also asks the same question regarding any leeway being granted from DIAC.

     

    http://www.pomsinadelaide.com/forum/adelaide-migration-issues/23383-475-visa-1-year-extension.html

     

    Please let me know if you can help, ideally we would want to make the move as planned in Jan 2012 as it really does not give us enough time to move in July this year but we need some definitive answers as we seem to be getting contradicting info.

     

    Best regards

     

    James Mooney

     

     

    Hi James

     

    I think your query to Nigel is comprehensive and it should elicit an accurate answer.

     

    Nigel goes abroad periodically. I think he goes off to talk to immigration experts in other countries about what is happening in Oz and what is happening in their own countries. If he doesn't reply fairly promptly - eg by the end of the month - please let me know and we'll see what can be done about chasing him.

     

    Meanwhile, the Aussie Budget for 2011/2012 was released a couple of days ago. They are planning some significant changes to the immigration programme. So far, I've only read Mark Webster's newsletter about it all.

     

    http://www.acacia-au.com/immigration_portfolio_budget_2011-12.php

     

    As yet, I haven't followed the links and so forth.

     

    At the minute, it looks like you will be in difficulty with the sc 887 visa programme. However they are planning to extend the ambit of the RSMS visa and to increase the quota of those. The policy for the sc 475 visa envisages that many holders of sc 475 visas will achieve PR via the RSMS programme and there are various exemptions in place that assist with upgrading to PR via this route instead of visa the sc 887 visa in the GSM programme.

     

    At the minute, I don't know whether the changes to the RSMS visa will help you because I haven't read the link that Mark Webster provides.

     

    Study it all, I suggest, because it might give you some comfort.

     

    Cheers

     

    Gill

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Guest james185
    Hi James

     

    I think your query to Nigel is comprehensive and it should elicit an accurate answer.

     

    Nigel goes abroad periodically. I think he goes off to talk to immigration experts in other countries about what is happening in Oz and what is happening in their own countries. If he doesn't reply fairly promptly - eg by the end of the month - please let me know and we'll see what can be done about chasing him.

     

    Meanwhile, the Aussie Budget for 2011/2012 was released a couple of days ago. They are planning some significant changes to the immigration programme. So far, I've only read Mark Webster's newsletter about it all.

     

    http://www.acacia-au.com/immigration_portfolio_budget_2011-12.php

     

    As yet, I haven't followed the links and so forth.

     

    At the minute, it looks like you will be in difficulty with the sc 887 visa programme. However they are planning to extend the ambit of the RSMS visa and to increase the quota of those. The policy for the sc 475 visa envisages that many holders of sc 475 visas will achieve PR via the RSMS programme and there are various exemptions in place that assist with upgrading to PR via this route instead of visa the sc 887 visa in the GSM programme.

     

    At the minute, I don't know whether the changes to the RSMS visa will help you because I haven't read the link that Mark Webster provides.

     

    Study it all, I suggest, because it might give you some comfort.

     

    Cheers

     

    Gill

     

    Hi Gill

     

    The RSMS visa certainly looks interesting, I looked on the DIAC website and couldn't see mention of the 475 visa being one of the visas qualifying for application for RSMS, do you know whether it is? I presume it must be as even the working holiday visa seems to be eligible.

     

    Is it your understanding that we could move to Australia anytime before our 475 visa expired and as long as one of us managed to get sponsored by an employer in SA then we could apply for the RSMS visa?

     

    It looks like it is definitely an option and has made us a lot more positive about our situation!

     

    I will wait to see if Nigel replies in teh next couple of weeks, if he doesn't I will be in touch if you don't mind so that you could possibly give him a nudge!

     

    Thanks for your help

    James

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Hi James

    Is it your understanding that we could move to Australia anytime before our 475 visa expired and as long as one of us managed to get sponsored by an employer in SA then we could apply for the RSMS visa?

    Yes. You are exactly correct. Please see the link below and scroll down till you get to the RSMS stuff:

    http://www.immi.gov.au/skilled/general-skilled-migration/sir.htm

     

    The employer does not necessarily have to be in SA because you don't necessarily have to be in SA either. However if you have decided to settle in SA then it is very unlikely that the prospective employer will be in some other State.

     

    With a 475 visa, the only obligation is to live and work in Regional Oz. The only part of QLD that is not "regional" is the area immediately round Brisbane, whilst Perth Metro is the only non-regional part of WA. The whole of the ACT is regional, as are the whole of the NT and TAS. In short, Regional Australia is one heckuva big place!

     

    It is not uncommon for a sc 475 visa holder to move to, say, SA. He then gets a job offer from an employer in, say, Cairns. In that situation, he must *notify* the State Immi people in SA and QLD respectively but the obligation is only to "notify" them both. Their permission is not required. The States just like to keep a few tabs on the situation because it enables each of them to work out how well their own plans for Regional Immigration in their respective States are actually working in practice.

     

    In your own situation, it would please the Federal Govt if you or your wife accepted a job offer plus an offer of RSMS sponsorship from an employer in Regional Oz. Such an arrangement would be likely to keep you in Regional Oz indefinitely and the Fed Govt likes that idea.

     

    Something like 85% of Australia's population is crammed into the main capital cities. Historically, this made sense because all of the State Capitals (apart from Canberra) are also Ports. However the total population of Oz is now about 22 million and 85% of them live in the main capitals. I think the stats are 7 million in Sydney, 4 million in each of Melbourne and Brisbane, 2 million in Perth and so forth. There is a very high concentration in each of the main State Capitals compared to the numbers of people in the rest of each State.

     

    The result is that unemployment levels can be (and often are) distortedly high in the capitals and there is also pressure on the infrastructure of the main capitals - eg schools, public transport etc. Meanwhile the rest of Oz is almost uninhabited by comparison and you can't create local economies unless you can persuade people to move to the locality in the first place.

     

    The present Government has long held a wish (even when they were in Opposition) to try to open up Regional Oz in order to exploit it. A long-standing Aussie whose family are all based in Melbourne, whose children are in school in Melbourne etc is not likely to take up a job offer which would mean moving his close family to Cairns or doing FIFO to Cairns on his own. A new immigrant is much more likely to be interested in helping the employer in Cairns because the new immigrant doesn't have the same sorts of pre-existing ties to some other place. After all, the distance from Melbourne to Cairns is about the same as between Paris and Budapest. The man from Melbourne might as well move to a different country because the climates in Melbourne and Cairns are completely different from each other and so forth. Cairns lies between the Tropic of Capricorn and the Equator, whereas Melbourne is about 44 S, I vaguely recall.

     

    When they were in Opposition, the now-Government floated the possibility of some sort of visa arrangement which would virtually force new immigrants to move to the Regions and would prevent them from cluttering up say, Sydney, instead. This sort of idea is a luvverly political/ideological wish but it is impossible to do it for real. You can't force people to do certain things but what you can do is make it easier for new migrants to move to and around Regional Oz and the RSMS visa is obviously being tweaked so that it can play its full part in the process of encouraging new migrants to head for the Regions. Where, with a bit of luck, they will stay!

     

    Cheers

     

    Gill

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Hi James

     

    However the total population of Oz is now about 22 million and 85% of them live in the main capitals. I think the stats are 7 million in Sydney, 4 million in each of Melbourne and Brisbane, 2 million in Perth and so forth. There is a very high concentration in each of the main State Capitals compared to the numbers of people in the rest of each State.

    The statement that I made above is inaccurate, I now realise. The population figures for the main capitals are about right but 85% of the population lives within 50km of the coast, albeit not necessarily in the State's capital.

     

    Cheers

     

    Gill

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Guest james185
    Hi James

     

    Yes. You are exactly correct. Please see the link below and scroll down till you get to the RSMS stuff:

    http://www.immi.gov.au/skilled/general-skilled-migration/sir.htm

     

    The employer does not necessarily have to be in SA because you don't necessarily have to be in SA either. However if you have decided to settle in SA then it is very unlikely that the prospective employer will be in some other State.

     

    With a 475 visa, the only obligation is to live and work in Regional Oz. The only part of QLD that is not "regional" is the area immediately round Brisbane, whilst Perth Metro is the only non-regional part of WA. The whole of the ACT is regional, as are the whole of the NT and TAS. In short, Regional Australia is one heckuva big place!

     

    It is not uncommon for a sc 475 visa holder to move to, say, SA. He then gets a job offer from an employer in, say, Cairns. In that situation, he must *notify* the State Immi people in SA and QLD respectively but the obligation is only to "notify" them both. Their permission is not required. The States just like to keep a few tabs on the situation because it enables each of them to work out how well their own plans for Regional Immigration in their respective States are actually working in practice.

     

    In your own situation, it would please the Federal Govt if you or your wife accepted a job offer plus an offer of RSMS sponsorship from an employer in Regional Oz. Such an arrangement would be likely to keep you in Regional Oz indefinitely and the Fed Govt likes that idea.

     

    Something like 85% of Australia's population is crammed into the main capital cities. Historically, this made sense because all of the State Capitals (apart from Canberra) are also Ports. However the total population of Oz is now about 22 million and 85% of them live in the main capitals. I think the stats are 7 million in Sydney, 4 million in each of Melbourne and Brisbane, 2 million in Perth and so forth. There is a very high concentration in each of the main State Capitals compared to the numbers of people in the rest of each State.

     

    The result is that unemployment levels can be (and often are) distortedly high in the capitals and there is also pressure on the infrastructure of the main capitals - eg schools, public transport etc. Meanwhile the rest of Oz is almost uninhabited by comparison and you can't create local economies unless you can persuade people to move to the locality in the first place.

     

    The present Government has long held a wish (even when they were in Opposition) to try to open up Regional Oz in order to exploit it. A long-standing Aussie whose family are all based in Melbourne, whose children are in school in Melbourne etc is not likely to take up a job offer which would mean moving his close family to Cairns or doing FIFO to Cairns on his own. A new immigrant is much more likely to be interested in helping the employer in Cairns because the new immigrant doesn't have the same sorts of pre-existing ties to some other place. After all, the distance from Melbourne to Cairns is about the same as between Paris and Budapest. The man from Melbourne might as well move to a different country because the climates in Melbourne and Cairns are completely different from each other and so forth. Cairns lies between the Tropic of Capricorn and the Equator, whereas Melbourne is about 44 S, I vaguely recall.

     

    When they were in Opposition, the now-Government floated the possibility of some sort of visa arrangement which would virtually force new immigrants to move to the Regions and would prevent them from cluttering up say, Sydney, instead. This sort of idea is a luvverly political/ideological wish but it is impossible to do it for real. You can't force people to do certain things but what you can do is make it easier for new migrants to move to and around Regional Oz and the RSMS visa is obviously being tweaked so that it can play its full part in the process of encouraging new migrants to head for the Regions. Where, with a bit of luck, they will stay!

     

    Cheers

     

    Gill

     

    Hi Gill, thanks for your informative post again..

     

    I am educated to A Level standard, I see that for the RSMS visa it says that the applicant needs to be educated to diploma standard.. would this be enough?

     

    I have asked Maryanne at True Blue and she seems to think that as long as I have enough experience it will be fine but I have now learnt to seek a second opinion!

     

    Thanks

    James

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Hi Gill, thanks for your informative post again..

     

    I am educated to A Level standard, I see that for the RSMS visa it says that the applicant needs to be educated to diploma standard.. would this be enough?

     

    I have asked Maryanne at True Blue and she seems to think that as long as I have enough experience it will be fine but I have now learnt to seek a second opinion!

     

    Thanks

    James

     

    Hi James

     

    http://www.immi.gov.au/skilled/general-skilled-migration/857.htm

     

    http://www.acacia-au.com/regional_initiatives_budget_2011-12.php

     

    You managed to collect a skills assessment OK or you would not have been able to obtain a sc 475 visa. Sure, the criteria have been tightened up since your sc 475 visa was sought but that is irrelevant. New law is very, very rarely applied in a way that works retrospectively because it would be grossly unfair to do that.

     

    Also, which occupation did you nominate for your sc 475 visa, using the ASRI list below, please?

     

    http://www.immi.gov.au/asri/

     

    What is the work experience alternative with your nominated occupation? It is usually either 3 years or 5 years, depending on the seniority of the position.

     

    DIAC are being seen to growl a bit about the RSMS visa but it is mainly Policy that is doing the growling, as opposed to the legislation itself. Policy is not Law and it can be interpreted very fluidly when it suits everyone's purposes to do so!

     

    If the applicant for an RSMS visa has enough work-experience, it is nearly always possible to do without a skills assessment, even when the applicant is outside Australia and so the sc 119 RSMS visa is the one sought.

     

    The sc 857 RSMS visa is the onshore version. To be eligible for this, he has to be in Oz in the first place and he has to be the holder of a "qualifying visa." The sc 475 is a qualifying visa. It is called a "provisional" visa to distinguish it from the "temporary" sc 457 visa - which is very temporary in nature.

     

    The Aussie Government believes that the holder of a sc 475 "provisional" visa is a Permanent Resident of Australia in all but visa status. They expect that he will obtain his PR status either via sc 887 or via sc 857. They are not really fussed about what type of work he does on the sc 475 visa because whatever it is, it will be tax-producing so it will be helping the Aussie economy in some way.

     

    He is also eligible to be considered for ANY permanent job as well as temporary jobs. This is important when a State Govt department will be the employer. The Unions have agreed with the State Govts that they will not offer permanent jobs to people who do not have PR but the sc 475 visa is an exception to this general rule.

     

    Somewhere on the Immigration SA website there is a letter that sc 475 visa holders can print off and show to prospective employers in case the employer thinks that "provisional" means "temporary" - which it does not.

     

    I'm not sure whereabouts the letter is - I tend to find it by stumbling around the Immigration SA website until I come across it by chance whenever I need to mention it to anyone! I don't have time to fish around right now but here is the fast, reliable link that will get you into the Immigration SA website. There is LOADS of other very useful information for new migrants on that website as well.

     

    http://www.migration.sa.gov.au/sa/home.jsp

     

    State Govt and local authority employers in SA tend to be very good with sc 475 visa holders. There tends to be less confusion about this "provisional" and "temporary" issue than with the equivalent employers in WA, for example.

     

    So in short, I don't think that your academic qualifications need be a worry.

     

    http://www.immi.gov.au/skills/regional-certifying-bodies.htm#sa

     

    Here is a link to the Regional Certifying Body in SA. The boss of that, about a year ago, was a lady called Robyn [someone] but I can't remember her last name and I don't know whether she is still involved with the RCB. Basically, if the RCB confirms that the employer [in SA] cannot find a more suitable employee for the job [than you] then the RCB confirms this and DIAC then grant the visa without any further hassle. I think that if you phone the RCB people, they would be able to reassure you. The best time to phone tends to be about 20 minutes before the official opening time in the morning - the boss is usually in and will speak to callers from overseas at that time of day, beofre his/her own office starts to get busy. You will need to check the time-zones.

     

    Cheers

     

    Gill

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Guest james185
    Hi James

     

    http://www.immi.gov.au/skilled/general-skilled-migration/857.htm

     

    http://www.acacia-au.com/regional_initiatives_budget_2011-12.php

     

    You managed to collect a skills assessment OK or you would not have been able to obtain a sc 475 visa. Sure, the criteria have been tightened up since your sc 475 visa was sought but that is irrelevant. New law is very, very rarely applied in a way that works retrospectively because it would be grossly unfair to do that.

     

    Also, which occupation did you nominate for your sc 475 visa, using the ASRI list below, please?

     

    http://www.immi.gov.au/asri/

     

    What is the work experience alternative with your nominated occupation? It is usually either 3 years or 5 years, depending on the seniority of the position.

     

    DIAC are being seen to growl a bit about the RSMS visa but it is mainly Policy that is doing the growling, as opposed to the legislation itself. Policy is not Law and it can be interpreted very fluidly when it suits everyone's purposes to do so!

     

    If the applicant for an RSMS visa has enough work-experience, it is nearly always possible to do without a skills assessment, even when the applicant is outside Australia and so the sc 119 RSMS visa is the one sought.

     

    The sc 857 RSMS visa is the onshore version. To be eligible for this, he has to be in Oz in the first place and he has to be the holder of a "qualifying visa." The sc 475 is a qualifying visa. It is called a "provisional" visa to distinguish it from the "temporary" sc 457 visa - which is very temporary in nature.

     

    The Aussie Government believes that the holder of a sc 475 "provisional" visa is a Permanent Resident of Australia in all but visa status. They expect that he will obtain his PR status either via sc 887 or via sc 857. They are not really fussed about what type of work he does on the sc 475 visa because whatever it is, it will be tax-producing so it will be helping the Aussie economy in some way.

     

    He is also eligible to be considered for ANY permanent job as well as temporary jobs. This is important when a State Govt department will be the employer. The Unions have agreed with the State Govts that they will not offer permanent jobs to people who do not have PR but the sc 475 visa is an exception to this general rule.

     

    Somewhere on the Immigration SA website there is a letter that sc 475 visa holders can print off and show to prospective employers in case the employer thinks that "provisional" means "temporary" - which it does not.

     

    I'm not sure whereabouts the letter is - I tend to find it by stumbling around the Immigration SA website until I come across it by chance whenever I need to mention it to anyone! I don't have time to fish around right now but here is the fast, reliable link that will get you into the Immigration SA website. There is LOADS of other very useful information for new migrants on that website as well.

     

    http://www.migration.sa.gov.au/sa/home.jsp

     

    State Govt and local authority employers in SA tend to be very good with sc 475 visa holders. There tends to be less confusion about this "provisional" and "temporary" issue than with the equivalent employers in WA, for example.

     

    So in short, I don't think that your academic qualifications need be a worry.

     

    http://www.immi.gov.au/skills/regional-certifying-bodies.htm#sa

     

    Here is a link to the Regional Certifying Body in SA. The boss of that, about a year ago, was a lady called Robyn [someone] but I can't remember her last name and I don't know whether she is still involved with the RCB. Basically, if the RCB confirms that the employer [in SA] cannot find a more suitable employee for the job [than you] then the RCB confirms this and DIAC then grant the visa without any further hassle. I think that if you phone the RCB people, they would be able to reassure you. The best time to phone tends to be about 20 minutes before the official opening time in the morning - the boss is usually in and will speak to callers from overseas at that time of day, beofre his/her own office starts to get busy. You will need to check the time-zones.

     

    Cheers

     

    Gill

     

    Hi Gill

     

    We actually got the 475 visa on my wifes nominated occupation as office manager, the plan is though that she would stay at home with the kids and I would be the main bread winner, at first at least!

     

    I am a sales/office manager and have worked in the role for my present company for 8 years but as I say, I am only educated to A Level standard.

     

    Reading through the SA website it looks quite encouraging in that it says that if you don't have the necessary qualifications your employer can write a letter to DIAC saying why they need to employ you and giving points that need to be covered in the letter, so hopefully it will be ok.

     

    Thanks again for your replies, I really do appreciate the time you take to give me such detailed insights!

     

    Thanks

    James

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Hi Gill

     

    We actually got the 475 visa on my wifes nominated occupation as office manager, the plan is though that she would stay at home with the kids and I would be the main bread winner, at first at least!

     

    I am a sales/office manager and have worked in the role for my present company for 8 years but as I say, I am only educated to A Level standard.

     

    Reading through the SA website it looks quite encouraging in that it says that if you don't have the necessary qualifications your employer can write a letter to DIAC saying why they need to employ you and giving points that need to be covered in the letter, so hopefully it will be ok.

     

    Thanks again for your replies, I really do appreciate the time you take to give me such detailed insights!

     

    Thanks

    James

     

    Hi James

     

    Once you are in Oz, either you, your wife or both can easily do suitable Diplomas for Office Management. You can do them on-line from home and they don't cost much. Under the new skills assessment arrangements, an Aussie Diploma gained on-line does not get one any Points towards a GSM visa, though it used to and British would-be GSM immigrants were routinely told to get an on-line Diploma in Business Management from Orion Training in Brisbane. Orion got the person's CV and arranged the Diploma so that the modules would be relevant to the prospective visa applicant's actual occupation. It was more than being just a spoodly Diploma. Tha lady in charge of Orion did arrange the course so that it would be of genuine value in the relevant work-place in Oz and/or the UK. There was genuine value for money in it, apart from the fact that an Orion Diploma also clinched the skills assessment 100% of the time!

     

    However in your situation you would already be in Oz, already working for the employer who wanted to sponsor you for an RSMS visa. GSM migration would not be involved so I doubt whether DIAC would fuss too much about a skills assessment - they'd be more interested in your work experience, both in Oz and elsewhere, I reckon. I agree with Maryanne about this.

     

    As long as the work you are doing can roughly be described as "office management" and you can produce evidence of your work-history in the UK to prove it, I doubt whether they would even want a skills assessment if you were the main applicant for the RSMS visa and even if they did want a skills assessment from you, I reckon that the on-line Diploma would probably suffice because we would not be considering GSM migration.

     

    The reason why DIAC are being seen to be a bit growly about the RSMS visa is because there are rumours that this visa has been abused. They are only rumours - nobody has been prosecuted as far as I know.

     

    In the years from about 2004 onwards, thousands of people moved to Oz as International Students and thousands of them studied Cookery. Cookery was on the MODL, it is easy to learn and easy to teach and the tuition is relatively cheap. The intention of the Students was that they would apply for GSM migration as soon as they graduated.

     

    DIAC warned the Government from about 2006 onwards that granting Student visas to all & sundry would create a situation where there were substantially more applicants for GSM visas than the annual quotas enabled DIAC to grant visas to. But at its zenith in 2008/2009, the business of educating International Students was an industry that was worth $17 billion AUD per year. It was Australia's third-largest source of foreign earnings. Coal is worth a bit more and I think iron ore is probably the leader.

     

    From about 2009, the Minister for Immi started growling that he intended to clamp down on granting GSM visas to people who had only just graduated and didn't have any real work-experience in Cookery.

     

    Because the occupation was on the MODL, the graduate Cookery students were able to obtain skills exemptions from the RSMS visa because the occupation was in enormous demand in Oz - otherwise it wouldn't have been on the MODL.

     

    DIAC became suspicious that middlemen were arranging "introductions" between the graduate Students and willing RSMS employers in the Backofbeyondup. The suspicion was that sums of up to $100,000 AUD were alleged to have been changing hands.

     

    I'm not sure whether that suspicion really had/has much foundation. I had a chat with a very experienced Frenchman about 18 months ago. He was a Chef and was on a 457 temporary visa, working for an employer fairly close to Brisbane. He was worried about whether he and his employer would be able to get an ENS visa because the criteria for those are stricter than for an RSMS but the employer was not based in "regional Oz."

     

    I asked the Frenchman why it was allegedly impossible to get Aussie Cooks and Chefs when the place was so close to Brisbane? He explained that there were plenty of suitably trained and experienced Aussies but that all of them refuse to be full time employees. Apparently it becomes searingly hot in the kitchens in summer so the relevant Aussies just do a few shifts, get enough money to go surfing and have a few tinnies and they don't care whether the customers in the restaurant get fed or not. Somebody who can't be relied on to turn up for work is not an ideal employee. The employer liked the Frenchman because he always went to work, no matter what.

     

    My sister lives in Perth. For the 30 years that she has lived in Oz, one of her dearest friends has been an Aussie called Bruce, who is a Chef. I've met Bruce and he came to help me one Christmas when Elaine and I were expecting about 14 people for lunch but neither of us had cooked for that many people before etc. Bruce was brilliant - a real pro and he showed me lots of shortcuts etc. He's the same as the Aussies in Brisbane, though. He won't cook for catering events in mid-summer because he says its too hot, the only thing that secured his help that Christmas was personal friendship etc and Elaine's house is air-conditioned anyway. It was not unduly hot in her own kitchen. However Bruce also mends computers and he does that most of the time.

     

    So I'm not convinced that DIAC's suspicions were/are really justified. What I know about Bruce and what the Frenchman was saying are exactly the same problem - on opposite sides of the continent - and all the trade magazine job-adverts reveal that everywhere in Oz is desperately short of Cooks who are willing to work full time. The Aussie Cooks will not make the commitment that the employers need them to make. An immigrant Cook on an RSMS visa will make the commitment and he'll turn up for work because his RSMS visa will be at risk if he doesn't. That risk will overcome his dislike of the kitchen temperature, so in many ways the immigrant Cook is a better bet than the Aussie. Also, the recently graduated immigrant Cook might not have as much experience as the Aussie but at least the diners can rely on getting a meal!

     

    Ergo I don't know whether the Aussie Government has been seeing gremlins where none really exist, but what I've just explained is the reason why they are growling about the RSMS. There is quite a lot of un-uttered xenophobia in the whole thing as well - the Govt won't admit it, but I'm certain that xenophobia does sway them quite a bit.

     

    However, when you consider the background to the growling about the RSMS visa, it is pretty obvious that DIAC would be unlikely to growl at you, my friend!

     

    Cheers

     

    Gill

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Guest james185
    Hi James

     

    Once you are in Oz, either you, your wife or both can easily do suitable Diplomas for Office Management. You can do them on-line from home and they don't cost much. Under the new skills assessment arrangements, an Aussie Diploma gained on-line does not get one any Points.

     

    However in your situation you would already be in Oz, already working for the employer who wanted to sponsor you for an RSMS visa. As long as the work you are doing can roughly be described as "office management" and you can produce evidence of your work-history in the UK to prove it, I doubt whether they would even want a skills assessment if you were the main applicant for the RSMS visa and even if they did want a skills assessment from you, I reckon that the on-line Diploma would probably suffice because we would not be considering GSM migration.

     

    The reason why DIAC are being seen to be a bit growly about the RSMS visa is because there are rumours that this visa has been abused. They are only rumours - nobody has been prosecuted as far as I know.

     

    In the years from about 2004 onwards, thousands of people moved to Oz as International Students and thousands of them studied Cookery. Cookery was on the MODL, it is easy to learn and easy to teach and the tuition is relatively cheap. The intention of the Students was that they would apply for GSM migration as soon as they graduated.

     

    DIAC warned the Government from about 2006 onwards that granting Student visas to all & sundry would create a situation where there were substantially more applicants for GSM visas than the annual quotas enabled DIAC to grant visas to. But at its zenith in 2008/2009, the business of educating International Students was an industry that was worth $17 billion AUD per year. It was Australia's third-largest source of foreign earnings. Coal is worth a bit more and I think iron ore is probably the leader.

     

    From about 2009, the Minister for Immi started growling that he intended to clamp down on granting GSM visas to people who had only just graduated and didn't have any real work-experience in Cookery.

     

    Because the occupation was on the MODL, the graduate Cookery students were able to obtain skills exemptions from the RSMS visa because the occupation was in enormous demand in Oz - otherwise it wouldn't have been on the MODL.

     

    DIAC became suspicious that middlemen were arranging "introductions" between the graduate Students and willing RSMS employers in the Backofbeyondup. The suspicion was that sums of up to $100,000 AUD were alleged to have been changing hands.

     

    I'm not sure whether that suspicion really had much foundation. I had a chat with a very experience Frenchman about 18 months ago. He was a Chef and was on a 457 temporary visa, working for an employer fairly close to Brisbane. He was worried about whether he and his employer would be able to get an ENS visa because the criteria for those are stricter than for an RSMS but the employer was not based in "regional Oz."

     

    I asked the Frenchman why it was allegedly impossible to get Aussie Cooks and Chefs when the place was so close to Brisbane? He explained that there were plenty of suitably trained and experienced Aussies but that all of them refuse to be full time employees. Apparently it becomes searingly hot in the kitchens in summer so the relevant Aussies just do a few shifts, get enough money to go surfing and have a few tinnies and they don't care whether the customers in the restaurant get fed or not. Somebody who can't be relied on to turn up for work is not an ideal employee. The employer liked the Frenchman because he always went to work, no matter what.

     

    My sister lives in Perth. For the 30 years that she has lived in Oz, one of her dearest friends has been an Aussie called Bruce, who is a Chef. I've met Bruce and he came to help me one Christmas when Elaine and I were expecting about 14 people for lunch but neither of us had cooked for that many people before etc. Bruce was brilliant - a real pro and he showed me lots of shortcuts etc. He's the same as the Aussies in Brisbane, though. He won't cook for catering events in mid-summer because he says its too hot, the only thing that secured his help that Christmas was personal friendship etc and Elaine's house is air-conditioned anyway. It was not unduly hot in her own kitchen. However Bruce also mends computers and he does that most of the time.

     

    So I'm not convinced that DIAC's suspicions were/are really justified. What I know about Bruce and what the Frenchman was saying are exactly the same problem - on opposite sides of the continent - and all the trade magazine job-adverts reveal that everywhere in Oz is desperately short of Cooks who are willing to work full time. The Aussie Cooks will not make the commitment that the employers need them to make. An immigrant Cook on an RSMS visa will make the commitment and he'll turn up for work because his RSMS visa will be at risk if he doesn't. That risk will overcome his dislike of the kitchen temperature, so in many ways the immigrant Cook is a better bet than the Aussie. Also, the recently graduated immigrant Cook might not have as much experience as the Aussie but at least the diners can rely on getting a meal!

     

    Ergo I don't know whether the Aussie Government has been seeing gremlins where none really exist, but what I've just explained is the reason why they are growling about the RSMS. There is quite a lot of un-uttered xenophobia in the whole thing as well - the Govt won't admit it, but I'm certain that xenophobia does sway them quite a bit.

     

    However, when you consider the background to the growling about the RSMS visa, it is pretty obvious that DIAC would be unlikely to growl at you, my friend!

     

    Cheers

     

    Gill

     

    Thanks Gill, that is reassuring and Maryanne seems confident that we wouldn't have a problem.

     

    Just a thought, now that our plan is to try and gain PR through RSMS or ENS as we can't fulfil the 2 year SA living requirement for the 475 pathway is there anything stopping us moving to say Sydney where there is a large employment market and working there in view to finding an employer to sponsor me for an ENS visa? Does the 475 restrict us to only working in regional Australia

     

    Is the ENS more difficult to get than the RSMS?

     

    Does the 475 restrict us to working only in 'regional' Australia or is that just for qualifying for PR??

     

    Thanks

    James

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Create an account or sign in to comment

    You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create an account

    Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

    Register a new account

    Sign in

    Already have an account? Sign in here.

    Sign In Now