VAC has been refunded after 41 months and hope to apply again

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Gollywobbler on January 8, 2011 at 17:24

Hi there

 

I'm looking for a man who calls himself Electrical Guy on another forum.  Is that you?    Electrical Guy is from India and is 33 or 34 but I don't know his real name.

 

To comment on your question, as I understand it a TRA approval is valid for the rest of your life so you would be able to use it again in connection with a new visa application for a sc 176.   That said, I went into this fairly carefully with Electrical Guy.   He told me that he did not get his TRA assessment under TRA's skilled pathway D, which was suddenly closed on 5th September 2007.

 

DIAC will find a way of weeding out any visa applications from people who used Pathway D for their skills assessments, I reckon.    I don't know how they would do this but I reckon that they would. 

 

Are you affected by Pathway D or did you get your own skills assessment pursuant to TRA's skilled Pathways A, B or E, please?  To remind you, Pathway D was for the people who did not have any formal, paper qualifications for their occupation but had simply been doing the relevant job for several years.  The other 3 Pathways all require paper qualifications. 

 

Cheers

 

Gill

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by handagalage aruna rangalal handa on January 16, 2011 at 12:16

Dear Gill

 

I never fall to catagory because I have completed three and half year full time call relating to electrical trade and I also have full technological diploma in Electrical Engineernng at City and Guilds of london institute. Gulginder is right. Certain occupation including general electrician and motor mechanic is not valid for applying skills assesment for TRA. But there no any information about previously got assesment. Am I right new criteria was interduced on 01st of september 2007. But one of my friend who with TRA skills assesment as motor mechanic lodge visa application (175) on one of  day in february 2008 got his visa last november and now he is in Australia. That means that perticular time TRA assesment was valid. Now it is puzzle. No answer has been received by DIAC when I raised this matter to them. How migration agent reply?? Susan also keep silent

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gollywobbler on January 22, 2011 at 1:16

Hi there

 

Hmmm. I don't know the answer to your question, my friend.  I'm a female lawyer and I don't undestand your qualifications since I'm not a migration agent and I haven't a clue about anything technical.

 

What occupation did you nominate for your visa?   General Electrican?  If yes, who provided your skills assessment in connection with your first visa application, please?   If you did not nominate General Electrican, what skill did you nominate, please? 

 

I suspect that the solution is to work backwards.  We need to find out what somebody with your qualifications and work background is called under ANZSCO.  Then you need to talk to the people who did your original skills assessment, I reckon.  They ought to know what the story is now regarding the validity of their old skills assessments.  Did you get your original skills assessment from Engineers Australia or someone like that?

 

Cheers

 

Gill  .

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by handagalage aruna rangalal handa on January 22, 2011 at 7:16

Dear Gill

My nominated occupation was general electrician (ASCO 431111=ANZSCO 341111) . TRA provided my skills assesment. No wonder that you didn't know further about this, because migration agents also dont know about this. When I inquired about this case they replied that I must again take my skills assesment from vetasses. It will cost approximately ten times of my previous assesment cost. But I found through hard effort it is not necessery to take new assesment. But worst thing is DIAC never clearly say anything about this. lot of people wasting their money because of this mis administration of DIAC. We can find this information on DIAC co-relation table of ASCO to ANZSCO schedule 3. Lot of applicants here(Sri Lanka) who ceased their application  were not refunded their money given as professional fee by migration agents. this is another bad situation caused to applicants due to bad administration of AUSTRALIAN GOVENMENT.even MARA never make any arrangement to refund the professional fees taken by the registered migration agents. I believe MARA must urge their registered agents to refund money tahen from innocent people. 

 

rangalal handagala

 

 

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gollywobbler on January 22, 2011 at 13:51

Hi again

 

Ummm!  Please bear in mind that I am not a migration agent and I am NOT an expert on your situation either.  In my own mind, I sort-of understand what II am getting at but I am not certain that I can explain myself sufficiently coherently.

 

The general rule is that a TRA assessment does not expire because of the passage of time and therefore it can be used to support a later application for a visa.   However, if the skills assessment was obtained under TRA's Skilled Pathway D (which was suddenly closed on 5th September 2007) then I think that there is a substantial risk that DIAC would find an excuse via which to reject the later visa application.   

 

Clearly, the migration agents whom you have consulted feel that the safest way forward would be for you to obtain a new skills assessment from Vetassess.  They might well be correct because either_=

1.  Your existing skills assessment was obtained under TRA Pathway D;  OR

2.  The new rules say that DIAC will not accept a skills assessment from you unless it is supplied by Vetassess - this would come down to the detailed DIAC Policy rules.  I don't know what the detailed rules say about this and they are not published so I can't look them up.  Registered Migration Agents are required to pay for a subscription to DIAC's detailed Policy rules and the rest of us are too stingy to pay for access to them, frankly.  OR

3.  The agents whom you have consulted cannot be bothered to spend a lot of time understanding the details.  They know that you will be OK if you supply a recent skills assessment from Vetassess and so they are protecting both you and themselves by recommending that you go to Vetassess. 

 

Have you asked the agents to explain why they are  advising you to get a second skills assessment from Vetassess?  If not, ask them, I suggest.  There is no sense in you & I trying to guess at an agent's reasons when he could tell us exactly what his reasons are, I suggest. 

 

Please ask the agents what their reasons are and then come back to me on this thread. I can't see any point in trying to guess about this and it is too important a question for guesswork.   

 

Cheers

 

Gill

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by guljinder on January 9, 2011 at 7:27

hi gill ,sorry to not telling u about my identity.i m the EG u r talking for. assessment by TRA for certain occupation including GENERAL ELECTRICIAN is now not valid for lodging application from recognized countries like INDIA,SOUTH AFRICA,ENGLAND,PAK,CHINA,FIJI and SRI LANKA too ,so it is no more valued for migration purpose and has replaced by vetassess.i am not sure but to me rangalal have to go for vetassess for new application costing about ten times than previous TRA assessment and totally wasting of money and time when diac has not showed commitment of service to be they are paid for.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gollywobbler on January 9, 2011 at 13:03

Hi Gulinder

 

How the very devil are you, my friend Electrical Guy?!!

 

I hear you about Vetassess but are you absolutely certain that all General Electricians would now have to do a new skills assessment with Vetassess at vast expense and inconvenience to themselves, plus the lengthy delays involved with the Vetassess process?  I was under the impression that if somebody has a skills assessment from TRA then the TRA assessment can be used instead for the purposes of a new visa application?  However I am NOT certain about this.  It is merely what I vaguely believe but I am not a migration agent and I could easily be wrong about this.  

 

The Vetassess website is below:

 

http://www.vetassess.com.au/migrate_to_australia/ts_assessment_proc...

 

Cheers

 

Gill

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jaspreet Singh Bajwa on January 10, 2011 at 13:47

 Very sad to hear from you  Mr. handagalage aruna rangalal handa

that you got your VAC back. It means they are still processing Pre September applications.

But one thing is good for you that u are applying again. Anyways. I would request you to be careful. As Gilly has mentioned that DIAC will find a way of weeding out any visa applications from people who used Pathway D for their skills assessments. So be careful..

Hey Gilly,

I am very pleased that I am able to make contact withyou again. Anyways I want to know through you that what will they do with 496?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gollywobbler on January 11, 2011 at 0:37

Hi Jaspreet (or Virtual Bajwa!)

 

I know hardly anything about sc 496 visas. What happened was that the then-owner of another forum asked me to become one of the mods on his forum during the middle of 2007.  At that stage, I knew nothing at all about skilled visas for Oz.  I thought I had better try to learn something about them so that I could become vaguely useful to some of the members.

 

However I soon gathered that the "old visas" (ie subclasses 136, 496 etc) were going to be closed to new applicants on 1st September 2007 and that there would be a whole range of new visas (sc 175, 475) etc with effect from the same date.  

 

I decided that it would be too complicated & confusing to try to learn about both groups of visas - bearing in mind that I knew absolutely nothing about skilled visas for Oz - so I decided to find out about the "new visas" (sc 175, 475 etc) only. 

 

The only thing that I really know for sure about the sc 496 visa is that it couldn't be included in the recent use of S39 because sc 496 does not contain the machinery for S39 to be used.  

 

I suspect that all the outstanding sc 496 applications would have been Capped & Ceased under S39 as part of Evans' "general cull" if it had been possible to do it.   I suspect that part of Evans' 'reason' for trying to introduce the Cap & Kill Bill 2010 was so that, if the new legislation had been enacted, it could have been used to kill off any outstanding pre-September 2007 applications that could not be killed off under S39.  I'm guessing and I could be totally wrong, but this is what I suspect.

 

From your own point of view, your occupation is on the SMP for SA and you seem to be OK on all of their SMP sponsorship requirements ASSUMING that your IELTS score is OK, which I would guess that it is.  

 

However the SMP doesn't say that it can be used to sponsor people who have applied for a sc 496 visa, so I suspect that you might have to get SA sponsorship and then make a new visa application for an sc 176 or sc 475 visa.  

 

If I am right about the idea that a new visa application might be necessary, I don't know whether you would also have to get a new skills assessment from Vetassess under the 2010 rules about that.  Do you know about this bit?   (For anyone who is wondering, Virtual Bajwa's occupation is Public Relations Professional.)  

 

I know that you are being advised by a Registered Migration Agent and obviously you will be guided properly by him, not uncertainly and hesitantly by me!

 

In a nutshell, I think you need detailed advice from your RMA about exactly what you need to do in order to take advantage of the fact that your occupation is on the SMP for SA.  

 

For you, I think it is a case of if you can get SMP sponsorship then you can definitely move to Australia and you should get your visa fairly quickly.  If for any reason you cannot get SMP sponsorship from SA then I think the outlook for you is doubtful.  

 

I stress that I think you ought to ask your RMA to advise on exactly where you stand and ask him what, if anything, you now need to do.  Once we know that, then we can take it from there.  

 

Cheers

 

Gill 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jaspreet Singh Bajwa on January 11, 2011 at 13:30

Hi Gill Palmer or Gollywobbler,

Ur explanation to the topics is always great that is why I like you most. Well, We are talking same thing again and again that DIAC and Minister has done something wrong to Pre September applicants. But the problem is who will fight against this undemocratic behavior of Minister and  DIAC.And specially who and how will we do? As some of the members here and on POMS thought about appealing against Cap and Cease. But I do not think this will work. Because they also know that it's big thing to do in standing against the Government policies.

Anyways let us see what happened. This is what we can do.

 

• ▶ Reply