UMA barred from applying for visa
This applicant was barred by five (5) types of BAR which prevents him from making any type of valid visa applications, including bridging visas.
These are our stories
(1) Search according to ‘Categories’ - click on the tags located next to the published dates.
(2) Search according to keywords
Partner Visa (SC 820/801 or 309/100) • PIC4020 • Visa Cancellation • Visa Refusal • Jason • Angela • ART Appeal Wins • Unlawful • Work Visas (SC 482/186) • Permanent Residency • Australian Citizenship • Family Violence • Character • Health • Natural Justice (S57) • NOICC • Ministerial Intervention • Genuine Temporary Entrant (GTE) • No Further Stay 8503
This applicant was barred by five (5) types of BAR which prevents him from making any type of valid visa applications, including bridging visas.
This applicant did not meet English language requirement for subclass 186. It was refused because the case officer believed that the salary was artificially inflated and there was no need for paid position.
This was a case of self-sponsorship. New company where the applicant was affected by the changes of law 01 July 2017 when his occupation was subjected to caveats and later removed. He was also caught by the decrease of age limit from 50 to 45 years old.
This was a doctor from UK who attempted to lodge her own PR from outside of Australia. She did not know that a bridging visa cannot be granted to offshore applicants. She arrived Australia on a work visa (457) shortly thereafter and when the 457 expired, she received a refusal for the PR because she did not know the legal criteria. When she was s.48 barred and unlawful, we acted quickly to get her a bridging visa A by applying a different law (not commonly known).
This visa applicant wanted a tourist visa. We at Agape were successful in helping our client.
Read MoreThis visa applicant wanted to get a friend into the country. We were able to get them a Partner Visa even though they were not partners.
This visa applicant was not able to meet the English language requirement and decided to sponsor himself a permanent visa (PR). It was quickly refused but we won on appeal.
The visa applicant successfully battled through the notorious ‘self-sponsorship’ which the Department of Immigration frowns upon.
The visa applicant had difficulties showing incentive to return home country and she had a lengthy immigration history. Moreover, she had already lodged a Partner Visa application which makes it more difficult to meet Genuine Temporary Entrant (GTE) criteria.
The occupation of pastry cook is subject to caveats even though it was not applicable when the application was lodged.
After several refusals and using other accredited specialists, Agape managed to help eight (8) orphan relative migrate permanently to Australia.