There are currently 21 Public Interest Criteria in Schedule 4 of the Migration Regulations. They deal with Character, health checks, children moving between countries, signing the values statement and declarations that an applicant intends to live permanently in Australia (amongst other things).
The most recent addition is 4020.
On 2 April 2011 this criterion was inserted by way of amendments of the Migration Regulations into the following visa subclasses – 119 (Regional Sponsored Migration – Employer Nomination), 121 (Employer Nomination Scheme), 175 (GSM Skilled Independent), 176 (GSM Skilled State Territory Sponsored), 457 (Business Long Stay),476 (Skilled Recognized Graduate) , 485 (Skilled Graduate), 487 (Skilled Regional Sponsored), 495 (Skilled Independent Regional Provisional), 496 (Skilled Designated Area Sponsored Provisional), 856 (Employer Nomination Scheme) , 857 (Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme), 880 (Skilled Independent Overseas Student) , 881 (Skilled Australian Sponsored Overseas Student), 882 (Skilled Designated Area Overseas Student), 883 (Skilled Designated Area Sponsored Residence),885 (Skilled Independent), 886 (Skilled Sponsored) and 887 (Skilled Regional).
Sorry about all that detail but it is very important to know which visa subclasses this PIC applies to. Over recent months I’ve been seeing an increasing number of DIAC letters threatening to invoke 4020 that ask the applicant to “comment” on something that DIAC have a suspicion about and visa refusals on the basis of this PIC.
So we are all on the same page this is what 4020 actually says…
(1) There is no evidence before the Minister that the applicant has given, or caused to be given, to the Minister, an officer, the Migration Review Tribunal, a relevant assessing authority or a Medical Officer of the Commonwealth, a bogus document or information that is false or misleading in a material particular in relation to:
(a) the application for the visa; or
(b) a visa that the applicant held in the period of 12 months before the application was made.
(2) The Minister is satisfied that during the period:
(a) starting 3 years before the application was made; and
(b) ending when the Minister makes a decision to grant or refuse the application;
the applicant and each member of a family unit of the applicant has not been refused a visa because of a failure to satisfy the criteria in subclause (1).
(3) To avoid doubt, subclauses (1) and (2) apply whether or not the Minister became aware of the bogus document or information that is false or misleading in a material particular because of information given by the applicant.
(4) The Minister may waive the requirements of any or all of paragraphs (1)(a) or (b) and subclause (2) if satisfied that:
(a) compelling circumstances that affect the interests of Australia; or
(b) compassionate or compelling circumstances that affect the interests of an Australian citizen, an Australian permanent resident or an eligible New Zealand citizen;
justify the granting of the visa.
(5) In this clause:
information that is false or misleading in a material particular means information that is:
(a) false or misleading at the time it is given; and
(b) relevant to any of the criteria the Minister may consider when making a decision on an application, whether or not the decision is made because of that information.
So it’s all about bogus documents and information that is false or misleading.
If you’re not familiar with it the Immigration Advice & Rights Centre Inc. is a source of a mass of first rate reliable immigration information.
In relation to this topic (PIC 4020) they have a very interesting publically (I found it via Google) available article by Kerry Murphy an Immigration Law Specialist lawyer and a legend in the migration advice profession that is essential reading – See: http://www.iarc.asn.au/_blog/Immigration_News/post/New_Schedule_4_requirement;_Criterion_4020/
Bottom line here is that DIAC have been finding too many questionable documents and this is their response. PIC 4020 is not asking every applicant to become a forensic expert and verify every document – that is simply impossible. As I read it the intent of PIC 4020 is to assess the intention of the applicant. Did the applicant knowingly submit a bogus document or provide misleading information with the intention of committing fraud or misleading DIAC, the MRT etc… 4020 is not there to catch out the innocent. If you do manage one way or another to fall foul of PIC 4020 get professional advice ASAP!
Happy New Year Grant.
Thanks for the plug.
Best wishes, Mark
Hi Grant,
How are you?,Thanks for sharing kind of useful information with all of us..I have one question, this is my timeline for lodged gsm885visa
Gsm485 lodged on 1/2/2010
Professinal year 1/3/2011
Gsm485 granted 4/8/2011
I married my girlfriend in Australia on 29/8/2011
Gsm885 lodged 12/9/2011 including her
C/o allocated on 21/11/2011 but still no reply form his/her
what could be the reason behind it? i am really worried about it..
Dear Nirav
The Christmas New Year period is very slow as many DIAC case officers are on leave. I’m sure you will hear from them soon.
Grant Williams
Hi Grant, thanks for reply, i have sent two msg since CO allocated but still no reply. I lodged my file in 15days after i married my girlfriend, would it be a big issue for immigration to make them think?.
Dear Nirav Yes this could be slowing down the process. DIAC of course want proof that a relationship is genuine. Simply handing over a marriage certificate means very little. I assume you have given them other proof of the genuine nature of your relationship/ Grant Williams
Hi Grant. I have given merriage cert, form no 888, my marriage photografs, me and my wife’s written statement, joint teneny letter, and bank statement. Would that be enough? Or i have to give more evedance to prove my gennun marriage?
Regards
Nirav
Dear Nirav That should be enough. If the case officer wants more they will ask for it. Grant Williams
Welcome back and Happy New Year – hope you had a nice break!
Has it occurred to anyone we have too many visa classes and simplification could be a wonderful thing?
Dear Robyn
Yes over the last 15 years I’ve seen the notion of simplification raised, embraced and partially implemented. Then over time it just fills up again with new visas. The present government is making all sorts of simplification noises. Time will tell but Federal governments rarely simplify things! Grant Williams
Hello Grant,
How are you? Your advice will change my life.
I have done TRA in 2009 and that was pure genuine , i have worked even after when my TRa was approved. I have only made a mistake that my restaurant owner told me that she cannot make experience letter , you have to get it from someone else and just show it to me before sending it to TRA. One of my friend suggested me to Carmine and i only did letter from him, but my experience was genuine. In 2010 Tra send me letter that my tra will be cancelled and if you want to revoke it send you comments. I used to write diaries that time and i always write my classes and working hours in restaurant. and also when Immigration come to my Restaurant to talk to my owner , i was working that time over there and they saw me there. I have send Tra all the records and statutory declaration from my side and from my restaurant owner , and after sometime after the investigation , they send me letter that my Tra remains valid. AFter that i have applied 886 visa on that basis, But on 24/01/2012 received an email from GSM which is detailed :
It has been brought to the Department’s attention that you may not satisfy PIC 4020 on the
basis of the following information being submitted to the Department:
On 15/5/2010, in support of your application for a 886 subclass visa, you provided to the Department a
skills assessment from Trades Recognition Australia (TRA). To obtain this skill assessment, you
supplied to TRA documents supporting your 900 hours work experience
On 4 November 2011, a Carmine Amarante pleaded guilty to the manufacture and sale of work
references matching the one submitted to Trades Recognition Australia (TRA) to obtain your skills
assessment. Amarante has admitted the documents were fraudulent in content and that they were
created to assist you to apply for permanent residence in Australia.
As a result of these events we have reason to believe that the skills assessment submitted as part of
your 886 application has been fraudulently obtained.
Please be advised that PIC 4020 requires that there is no evidence before the Minister that the
applicant has given, or caused to be given, to the Minister, an officer, the Migration Review
Tribunal, a relevant assessing authority or a Medical Officer of the Commonwealth, a bogus
document or information that is false or misleading in relation to:
the application for the visa; or
a visa that the applicant held in the period of 12 months before the application was
made.
As evidence has been found in your application that suggests a bogus document or
information that is false or misleading in a material particular has been submitted, you are
strongly encouraged to carefully read the following information to further understand how
this matter can be addressed with the Department.
Please guide me what should i do , i am really stressed , Your advice will make some difference. PLease tell me what should i do , i only have 28 calendar days. Please help me.
Dear Sweety
What you have here is a major problem. DIAC have prima facie evidence that you have submitted a bogus document. They have a conviction against the supplier of this document. You admit to this to me above. Whichever way you explain your actions to DIAC you have still given them a bogus document. DIAC will refuse your application in my opinion sighting PIC 4020. They are not in the least bit understanding of your position. You can try to convince them but in the end the facts will be the same.
Sorry there is no magic fix once you’ve made this sort of mistake.
Grant Williams
But Grant. That person was acting as an Agent in market. But we haven’t done any Fraud the documents we have provided to TRA was Genuine our Intention was Genuine..The letter we have provided was genuine the only thing we have got letter written by him as our employer told he is good agent. Another thing my husband , bothers sister and parents are Australian Citizens and Permanent. they planning to leave Australia if we leave as we have attachments with them my Parent in Law cant live without us. If they give a declaration and all family give declaration does it comes under compelling and compassionate circumstances .
What DIAC have alledged is not necessarily that you manufactured the bogus document but that you submittted the bogus document. Now you say the foundation information upon which the document was raised was all true and correct and that you submitted the document in good faith. DIAC clearly feel that given the circumstances of this ‘agent’ that you were in some way involved in this fraud.
All the business about your family is not relevant to this situstion nor would it constitute compelling & compassionate circumstances.
Your only hope here is stay focused on proving that you provided the document believing it to be bnao fide.
You really do need to get some professional help in submitting your application.
Grant Williams
Sweety can you please reply me back on my e-mail as I got the same case like you my e-mail address is
garysingh09@gmail.com
Gary
This is your second post looking for your friend. This is not Facebook – that’s enough.
Grant Williams
hey,
u can try employer sponsorship visa in any other catageory means occupation but not in same field which u got rejection or pic 4020. u can apply in australia only paper visa not online. u can talk with 457 visa unit in parramatta if ur in nsw.
Hi Garry Not sure what you’re suggesting here but if an applicant has had 4020 applied by DIAC to refuse an application the only way forward is to have that decision overturned at the MRT. Not all visa subclasses have the PIC 4020 as a criterion at time of decision however DIAC have other avenues to follow up applicants who have provided false, misleading or bogus information in previous applications. For example they can raise a character issue under s.501 and use this as a basis for refusal. Anyone in this situation is best advised to seek professional advice to see if it is worthwhile attempting any subsequent application. It’s easy to waste a large amount of money and get nowhere. Grant Williams
Dear Grant, Your blog stands out as genuinely helping people understand this incredible complexity – thank you very much. My overseas friend has Certificate III & IV in cooking (but not Diploma) and has moved to a QLD mining area in the hope of 857 sponsorship as a cook. He has 2 years relevant experience and did all the study here. IELTS score & age are fine. Does he have a realistic chance of success under “exceptional circumstances” provisions of avoiding the need to have a Diploma level qualification? Has anyone ever had success in this? From my google research it looks very doubtful but I can’t find anything related to this exact question. Is there any kind of anonymized database which gives a summary of a individual cases and outcomes? Many Thanks!
Dear Thomas
No database I’m afraid. Lots of leg work to find cases.
I don’t see that he’ll really have a problem with GSM as the qualification for a Cook is CertIII
ANZSCO says…
In Australia:
AQF Associate Degree, Advanced Diploma or Diploma, or at least three years of relevant experience
(ANZSCO Skill Level 2); or
AQF Certificate III including at least two years of on-the-job training, or AQF Certificate IV, or at least three
years of relevant experience (ANZSCO Skill Level 3)
He seems to meet the second with AQF Cert III + 2 years exp???
Grant Williams
Dear Grant, You are a kind soul helping distressed immigration seeking people. I seek your expert advice to find out the best way for me. I am an International student studying IT in Monash and unluckily will graduate after July, 2012 when the new EOI will be implemented. I currently meet the minimum points for 175 and also have my occuption in the Victorian sponsorship list. As the bridging visa is going to go away in July, 2012 till an applicant receives PR invitation after Jan, 2013. Do you think it is in my best interest to lodge offshore PR before july 2012. I am afraid that processing time for 885 is not going to improve with the new EOI format and in that case, I will be losing good 7-8 months if I do not file 175/176 before July. If this helps, I am currently employed in the area of my studies. Any advice is highly appreciated.
Dear Simone
Your situation will soon become the normal position for all GSM applicants. Yes you could lodge offshore but these visa are also EOI. To stay here while you wait for / hope for an EOI invitation you will need to get a new visa. Employment, given the limited amount of information I know about your case seems the obvious option. This is the government’s preferred option / highest priority. You need to sort out whether it is possible for a direct Employer Nomination (ENS) application for PR or whether you’ll have to go for TR visa the Business Long Stay (457) program – both of course require employer applications and a willingness from your employer to sponsor you.
Grant Williams
Thanka Grant for your response. I understand that offshore PR would go EOI after July,2012. Should I lodge an oddshore PR before July and take TR 485 after my student visa expires i.e. In Aug, 2012? ENS is not an option for me but 487 might be possible. However 487 or 485 are both temporary visas and I want PR. I am positive that I will get invitation to file PR if I submit EOI, but I want to avoid filing 885 in 2013 unless the processing times are promised to be faster. So my options are- to file 176 or 175 before July or file 885 in 2013. Which one do you sugest is best route?
Dear Simone I can’t tell you what to do. However 885 processing times are very short for new applications for occupations on the SOL under the new points test. The last one we had granted was less than 3 months from date of application and it had a complicated medical for a non-migrating child. Sometimes under the new system you have to move to TR before you can get PR. So TR for work might be worth considering. Grant Williams
Hi Grant,
I a have critical issue with my GSM application with 1 year experience.
I have applied for v885 under old points system with a 1 year experience in IT. My total experience is 18 months at the time of lodgement with 10 months of fulltime and 8 months of permanent part-time (18.75 hours/2.5 days). I have continued working in the company even now. My case officer was not convinced by this one. I don’t have any other commercial experience to satisfy the 52 weeks rule.
Could you please let me know what can I do regarding this…..?
What is the chance of getting through a MRT?
Thanks for your help in advance.
Prasad
Hi Prasad
First I need more info to be able to advise you. Are you saying you applied for 885 and DIAC are saying you do not meet the threshold recent work experience requirement 12 last 24 months recent relevant work experience? For GSM the definition of ‘work’ is a minimum of 20 hours per week. So your 18.75/week will not fly I’m afraid. That’s why the case officer says you only have 8 months not 12.
Grant Williams
Thanks for the response!
Yes Grant I have applied for 885 GSM visa. I have applied through a migration agent who said that there is a possibility of DIAC accepting this.
My initial offer was given as 2.5 days and I misunderstood that it is equivalent to 20 hours.
Now I am waiting for the response from the case officer on it.
Can you please advise me what is the best possible way for me.
Dear Prasad This is difficult I’d be asking the agent what basis they had for considering that DIAC would accept work experience that did not meet the GSM definition of work. If it is refused then it would seem that that advice was less than stellar.
What can you do? Well it’s not possible to change your story and say oh it was actually 20 hours a week as they will then say you’ve attempted to mislead them and quote Public Interest Criterion 4020 even though you’ve disadvantaged yourself.
It rather depends on what the case officer does next. If they ask for a further submission I guess you have some wiggle room. They could of course just refuse the application for not meeting the threshold criterion.
What does your ‘agent’ say?
Grant Williams
Dear Grant,
Love your blog and everyday I visit it to see if there is a new post. Just one question, I have applied for a GSM 886 visa back in September 2009. According to you & this is just a guess, do you think that I would get my visa before the 1st week of April. I ask this because I have very good friend’s wedding 2nd week of April and would like to travel overseas as he has asked me to be in his wedding party. Thanks
Hi Stafford
I’m pleased you enjoy the Blog.
I’d say no I’m afraid. Reports suggest that DIAC are somewhere into early to mid 2008 application dates now – so that’s still more than a year’s worth of application ahead of you. No one can say how applications are distributed in the P5 group – how many reside in each month – they have the figures they just don’t release them.
If you’re on a BVA you could apply for a BVB and travel to the wedding. Form 1006 fee $105 last time I looked. Apply within two weeks of wanting to travel and make sure you come back before the BVB expires. If you’re not on a BVA this will not work.
Grant Williams
Thanks for your reply Grant,
I am currently on a BVA but was/still hoping to get my PR visa by April as I am unsure if there will be any problems in getting my PR if I switch to a BVB or if my application is assigned to a case officer while I am away for the 2 weeks. Fingers crossed they aren’t to many new applications.
Sorry Grant for posting a comment to person before Very sorry.
Grant if you can help me plz DIAC refused my Visa class 886 application on the basis of fraudalent information obtained.And I actually worked in the restaurant and cant able to produce any further signed from restaurant owner.
What you think results in Mrt would be.I am still working in different restaurant on casual basis Is that going to be any helpful.How long Mrt processing time normally takes.
Thanks.
Dear Gary Well that’s a problem. So are you saying that the document provided to DIAC was not fraudulent? Or are you saying that you actually worked there however the document you provided was not completely true and correct? If you go to the MRT and provide no additional evidence to demonstrate that DIAC are not correct you will lose. First please explain your situation and then I’ll make some suggestions. If you have actually provided a bogus document nothing will help! Grant Williams
My application was rejected on the basis of fraudelent information as Diac stated that they find my name from some person computer who was jailed and he admit that he provided the work experience to me.But I actually worked there my owner admits that I work in the restaurant but he cant sign me any letters.I applied Mrt.What you think Mrt results would be.And how long waiting period of Mrt.Any other option left after Mrt.
Regards
Gary Bhinder
Dear Gary There are lots of people who have been caught in this sting and conviction. Why can’t you employer sign any letters? The MRT wait may be 12 -24 months. You will only have a chance at the MRT if you can actually prove you worked there. Why did you get the experience letter from this person if they were not your employer? You need professional help! Grant Williams
Hi Grant,
I have recieved a letter from Immigration in 2009 saying as per the workplace records I jave done less than required hours & the letter I have recieved from my Employer and used for TRA is not genuine. I provided them with a stat dec, breakdown of 900 hours from company again. Again in 2012 I have recieved same letter with PIC 4020. Wht should I do. I am genuine, my letter is , my TRA is valid.What is my fault?? If the company cannot keep the rcords properly why am i At fault. What should i do?Please suggest.
Dear m
From a Migration law standpoint it is your responsibility to ensure or make all reasonable efforts to ensure that all the information provide to DIAC is correct. PIC 4020 now applies to all GSM applications. You MUST respond to this 4020 letter in the strongest possible terms and provide as much additional evidence as possible to support your position that you have met the work experience requirement. There are currently quite a few people in this situation in relation to the conviction of one individual who supplied work experience letters. I’m not sure obviously if you are one this group.Just giving them what they already have will not solve this problem. If you’re unsure what else to provide you need to seek professional assistance that allows a representative to look at all your documents and then assist in the response.
Grant Williams
Hi Grant, Thanks for the reply. I have provided all the proofs and declarations poosible to them again. Its just that the documents are same as which i provided last time when i recived the letter.And they will always remain the same because they are genuine. I have worked these hours sincerely. And after completion of 900 hours i have recievd the refernce letter.I am concerend why were they not satified with these documents at first place.
Thanks for the advice.
Dear M Clearly they are not satisfied and you need to get more. You need to start thinking who else can give you Commonwealth Statutory Declaration in relation to the time you worked? Fellow employees? Customers? Other students from your institution? Just giving them the same stuff cannot solve the problem. Grant Williams
Hi Grant,
Thanks for the quick reply & your advice.
Hi Grant
I hope this is the relevant section to post this query. I’ve spent close to 1 year trying to complete my ENS Subclass 856 application forms. My company submitted their side, after some considerable to-ing and fro-ing with DIAC, in November. My company received a couple of requests, with regards to documentation clarification, in December but we haven’t heard from them since. I subsequently submitted my side in the middle of Jan and received confirmation from DIAC a day later that the application was deemed valid.
I had heard some very positive stories coming up to Christmas where 3 of my friends, under the ENS scheme, received their approvals within 3-5 weeks. 2 other friends, with the assistance of Migration agents, received theirs in under two weeks.
In your experience, was there any particular reason for this splurge of visa approvals? Can I expect the same speedy reply and if not, have you any tips to somehow speed up the process?
Obviously, with the assistance of my recently approved friends applications, and after diligently providing all the appending documentation requesting and more – I’m confident I’ve provided all the necessary appending documentation.
Any advise or tips would be greatly appreciated
Keep up the good work
E
Dear E
Migration Agents have a special system in relation to ENS applications known as the Decision Ready Checklist. We sign off on this if every necessary document is included in an application when it is lodged. If we don’t do this correctly we lose this special access.
We generally get decison ready applications approved in about 2 weeks.
Your 856 visa application cannot be processed until your employers Nomination has been approved. Then they will look atthe 856.
Time frame as they have had to ask for documents is very difficult to say as I have not seen your application – usually quite a few months.
Once you’re at this point all you can do is wait for DIAC and do what they ask asap.
Grant Williams
Hi Grant
Thanks for the above. I really appreciate your swift response.
I’m well aware of the Decision Ready process (I’ve become pretty well briefed with the system over the past year) but my HR Manager, I thought, was across everything and hence a Migration agent wasn’t deemed necessary (a regret in hindsight).
In April of last year, she apparently put in the Employers Nomination side. There were questions from DIAC however, because our company had been recently taken over and hence DIAC were suspicious about the validity of our new company name (I won’t bore you with the details).
There has been correspondence between my employer and DIAC since then and a renewed Employer Nomination, with all the subsequently requested info from DIAC regarding the company etc, submitted in November as outlined above.
Is it typical for the Nomination to take this long? My company were 250 people strong, having done countless 457′s (mine took 2 days to process), and now we’re under the umbrella of a company that employ 13,000 people worldwide. I wouldn’t have thought DIAC would be suspicious of a company of this size and stature. And even so, having provided all the required documentation over a 7/8 month period consultation period, things would be done by now.
Again, thanks for all your help.
Dear E The general quoted queue time is 10.5 months. You’ve had two digs at the Nomination so I’m not surprised it’s taking this long. They don’t weigh the applications by company size they simply apply the Migration Regulations and it is up to the applicant – company or person – to provide documents to show they meet the criteria.
Once DIAc feel there is a problem they basically check and cross check everything – again makes the proces much slower.
Grant Williams
Hi Grant
Is there any options available if u are thinking pic 4020 can be apply on ur visa u applied for?
Dear Gurbrinder
Why would you be thinking that?
Grant Williams JP 195363 Registered Migration Agent MARN 0854799 Immigration Pty Ltd Suite 35 / 647 – 649 George St Sydney 2000 PO Box K1221 Haymarket NSW 1240 Telephone: +61 2 92114694 Mobile: +61 (0) 430351877 Email: immigrationptyltd@gmail.com Blog: http://immigrationptyltd.wordpress.com
Because one of my work colleague got that latter and I m afraid may be they will send me too . I had applied for 886 on 4/7/2009.Plz suggest.
You can only wait and see and then respond if you get the 4020 letter. You know if your work experience is all genuine. If it’s not then all you can do is expect DIAC to find out. Grant Williams
Hi Grant,
A dishonest officer from Australian embassy in my country has submitted a false investigation report about my job responsibilities in my previous company. That’s why my case officer has sent a SFI letter to me on June 2011. My visa type is 475 GSM.
Can you suggest me what can I do? Because its already 8 months gone after submission of all documents asked by my case officer. Who iswill be responsible for this unwanted situation and delay?
THANKS
For your study you can read my previous company’s HR letter to DIAC case officer:-
“Dear Sir,
Our Ex employee, Mr. ((())) came in ((())) on (((())) and showed me the SFI letter which he has received from you, dated on ((()))). I have carefully read your letter and totally surprised that the investigation visa officer from Australian embassy in ((())), who just contacted with me over telephone, has submitted a misleading, wrong and self-perception made faulty investigation report to DIAC. The job responsibilities, that (((())) has submitted to DIAC is 100% correct and genuine.
The investigation visa officer from Australian embassy in((()))contacted with me over telephone to do quarry about Mr. ((())) job responsibilities, duties and others confidential sophisticated information. But ((((())) has some strict code of conducts. As like:-
• We never provide any confidential sophisticated and detail information of any employee of our company over telephone.
• And though Mr. ((())) was our Ex employee, all his detail database and information has frozen to our central store. So, in our running server only his basic and general data has preserved.
So, I invited that visa officer to come to our office physically and collect the detail information. But after that telephone conversation, he never came to collect the detail information. Rather, he was interested to collect only that general and basic information about ((()))) over telephone from me. So, I provided him only the general information. And I strongly believe that he has prepared his investigation report based on that general information. That’s why he has submitted a misleading, wrong and self-perception made faulty investigation report to DIAC.”
Dear AAH
First you need to be very careful about making claims of dishonesty. You were not preent when the call was made and you only have the word of your former employer. DIAC officers and sometimes DFAT oficers are regularly tasked with the job of confirming work experience claims made by applicants. They check it’s their job! If you disagree with the assessment (and you are being given the opportunity to respond) then respond calmly, state your position and support what you say with aditional supporting evidence. Letters. statutory delcarations from the employer and perhaps others who worked withere at the same time. If you accuse officials in this manner it will not help your cause. What possible reason could a person who does not know you at all have to falsify their report? The person may have drawn the wrong conclusions from the information they were given. However over the years I’ve found when we obtain reports under Freedom of Information that it is the respondant to DIAC questions (your employer) who give vague or at times misleading information and can’t really be bothered expanding when they are asked often giving reasons like company policy. If they’ve supplied a written reference to you and you have used it they have your explicit permission to release all you relevant information – so claiming the records are all locked up or company policy prevents is just nonesense I’m afraid and DIAC assume that there may be issues with the reference. I would draw the same conclusion! You need to respond with as much detailed information as possible. Pay records, tax records, examples of work related correspondence from the company to you etc…more is better than less in this case.
Grant Williams
Hi Grant,
Thanks for your time and response. I liked your suggestion. But I am not coincide with your personal Conclusion.
Lets wait for DIAC decision. Hope they will approve my application shortly.
THANKS again.
hi giant
how DIAC asses pic 4020.
Dear asa
Have you read this post on my Blog?
http://immigrationptyltd.wordpress.com/2012/01/23/public-interest-criterion-pic-4020/
Grant Williams
Hey Grant…..absolutely wonderful blog…..I was reading above comments regarding PIC 4020 and was wandering if there’s not enough evidence to prove genuiness of your experience letter would it be good idea to withdraw your application and apply on fresh basis. Say, if you have australian partner, applying offshore defacto/spouse visa would be worth or it still comes under PIC 4020?
Also I have got another question….my partner applied for 485 visa in 02/09/2008 and 10 days later applied for 886 visa as his student visa was running out and we thought just to be on safe side go for 485. As it’s a long wait and there’s no hope of getting residency sooner. Do you think, if we withdraw his 886 file but 485 remains active keeping him on bridging visa A. Leave country for a day and apply offshore spouse visa and then 485 file keeps processing and once offshore spouse visa is granted, his 485 file can be withdrawn as well.
Awaiting our reply. Thanks
Regards
Sam
Hi Grant,
If visa has been refused under PIC4020 . I am going to marry with Australian Citizen. 3 yearbar still implement on my case or not.
Thanks
Chamak
Dear Chamak
Not a simple answer I’m afraid. The only answer I can d=ghive is…That depends.
It depends on lots of factors. For example to 4020 reason for refusal. Everything else about you – police certificates, medicals etc… past info held by DIAC. Then there’s the actual partner application – you must be able to prove a ‘genuine’ relationship. Just being married does not = genuine relationship I’m afraid.
You need to seek professional advice. It’s not going to be as simple as you hope!
Grant Williams
Dear Sam
4020 is not easy to get around if an applicant has in fact prvoded false or misleading info and DIAC have proof. Just becasuse 4020 may not be a criteriaon on a vias subclass doeas not mean DIAC will not raise this action as a general character issue under s.501. Simply withdrawing an application does not mean that the provision of the ‘false’ documnet has not occurred. There may be an option to address this in certain applications where other rights (say of an Australian citizen partner) have greater sway than say a false work experience letter but each case will be looked at individually and you cannot assume it will all be OK. When confronted with a DIAC natural justice letter an applicant must respond in full and should seek professional assistance.
Your other scenario is rather complicated and I’m not an advocate of multiple applications as some sort of back up system. I’d keep the applications that are in active. If the 485 is all fully documented and valid in every way it will be granted and and run for 18 months. If the 886 does not get approved before the 485 expires lodge the Partner onshore from the 485 in a decison ready format (you’ll have lots of time to get it perfect) before the 485 expires.
Grant Williams