Australia Holiday Visa Problems For Thai Wife.

[gburns57au]

To be eligible for this visa you must have a genuine intention to visit Australia as a tourist, for recreation or to visit your family and/or friends.

This is the interesting part of the eligibilty criteria for the 676 visa.

[david96]

With reference to posts #28 and #30.

No, it is not "a naive comment" or is it "borderline racist". I think you meant "racial".

It is from my personal experience. When in Australia my wife extended her multi entry visa

by 3 months so as to save returning to Thailand and coming back again as we were going to Thailand anyway.

Processing was quick, courteous and efficient. I remarked to the administration officer that the culture of DIAC was a welcome change to DIAC in Bangkok. "It is a pleasure to do business

with you" I remarked.

The AO agreed with me and remarked that they had some problems themselves at times.

The difference is cultural, a Thai will approach a task differently from an Australian.

While we were in the DIAC office the AO mentioned that my wife should apply for a spouse

visa in the future as I was living in Australia. I replied that we would be applying when she returned to Thailand. It was a verbal advice only.

There was no mention at any time of my wife being refused a 676 visa in the future.

Purpose of visit? To visit her husband of course. All they were concerned about was that she

had a return air ticket and sufficient funds for her period of stay.

Criteria met.

[Mason45]

To be eligible for this visa you must have a genuine intention to visit Australia as a tourist, for recreation or to visit your family and/or friends.

This is the interesting part of the eligibilty criteria for the 676 visa.

I totally agree gburns but how genuine can she be. It stated in the unsuccesfull visa application that I was receiving a substantial amout of money every month via my superannuation, I own my own home in Australia. The letter she received stated several reasons why a visa maybe refused and it stated that my wifes application wasn't considered genuine because she didn't satisfy one or more of the conditions, that's rather vague to say the least. I've got 4 Aussie friends who were given the same ultimatum after the second visa, it's either a spouse visa or nothing, they chose the spouse visa because they wanted to live in Australia, whereas we don't. As for the reason my wife wanted a third tourist visa was of course to visit our family, friends, travel and take care of some personal business. It begs the question if my wifes situation is the same as when she received her first 2 visas then how was she considered genuine previously.

PS : Last night I sent an email to the Australian Embassy in Kuala Lumpur, I received a reply this morning and it was personal not automated. It states that for flexibility sake it would be wise for my wife to apply for a spouse visa but considering that she won't be living Australia, she can apply for a tourist visa and there's no limit but if she were to live in Australia for more than 6 months in any one year then she would have to apply for a spouse visa or return to her own country. Do these 2 embassys work for the same government, as they seem to contradict each other.

[gburns57au]

To be eligible for this visa you must have a genuine intention to visit Australia as a tourist, for recreation or to visit your family and/or friends.

This is the interesting part of the eligibilty criteria for the 676 visa.

I totally agree gburns but how genuine can she be. It stated in the unsuccesfull visa application that I was receiving a substantial amout of money every month via my superannuation, I own my own home in Australia. The letter she received stated several reasons why a visa maybe refused and it stated that my wifes application wasn't considered genuine because she didn't satisfy one or more of the conditions, that's rather vague to say the least. I've got 4 Aussie friends who were given the same ultimatum after the second visa, it's either a spouse visa or nothing, they chose the spouse visa because they wanted to live in Australia, whereas we don't. As for the reason my wife wanted a third tourist visa was of course to visit our family, friends, travel and take care of some personal business. It begs the question if my wifes situation is the same as when she received her first 2 visas then how was she considered genuine previously.

PS : Last night I sent an email to the Australian Embassy in Kuala Lumpur, I received a reply this morning and it was personal not automated. It states that for flexibility sake it would be wise for my wife to apply for a spouse visa but considering that she won't be living Australia, she can apply for a tourist visa and there's no limit but if she were to live in Australia for more than 6 months in any one year then she would have to apply for a spouse visa or return to her own country. Do these 2 embassys work for the same government, as they seem to contradict each other.

I highlighted that part as it is separate to the first part.....

Did you address the application from a tourist view or to visit family etc... I think it may make a difference.

Your application should have contained a letter stating the intentions and explaining your situation, including that you are applying to visit family and friends and not as a tourist or for a holiday......evidence of your continued living in Thailand such as a certified copy of your visa, rent agreements, work contracts etc... If you have applied as a mere tourist then that is how they would look at it.

It is likely that her file is marked for a spouse visa and you need to overcome that....if you apply again, It may be prudent to include a certified copy of the KL mail as well.

I dont know under what avenue you applied last time....but you do need to be specific when you do apply.

A friend of mine got a third tourist visa recently....she met a fella on her last trip and applied as visiting friends not as a tourist, so that they could further the relationship with the view of applying for a spouse visa later. She has been told that the next application needs to be a spouse visa (that is the intended plan).

[david96]

Quote from post #33.Mason45

"it would be wise for my wife to apply for a spouse visa but considering that she won't be living Australia, she can apply for a tourist visa and there's no limit but ifshe were to live in Australia for more than 6 months in any one year then she would have to apply for a spouse visa or return to her own country".

This is the answer you should have received in the first place.

It just shows that there is a different work and service culture between Immigration

at the Australian Embassy in Bangkok and the Embassy in K.L.

The answer you received by e-mail makes sense and justifies what I wrote

in a previous post.

Here is another example:

3 months ago I sent an e-mail to a particular Thai staff member of DIAC and received a

reply within 1 hour. It stated that (she) "would be away from the office for 5 days" and would reply then. I am still waiting for the reply. I sent her reply directly to DIAC in the ACT within

10 minutes. The matter was cleared up quickly by an Australian AO.

2 months ago I sent another email to the same staff member in Bangkok and I have never received a reply. I also sent the same email to the ACT office, I received a reply from them.

And it was the ACT office that asked me to contact Bangkok, now I know why.

[gburns57au]

Could I suggest that the Bangkok Embassy deals with a lot more applications than KL......They would be dealing with a lot more overstays, fraudulent applications etc etc......Therefore they would be a lot more stringent with their processing than KL

It may not be so much a cultural difference but more a case of being burnt too many times.

I am sure that if there were a large number of overstays and such from that Embassy, then there would be a please explain from the Australian Immigration heads.

[harrry]

Could I suggest that the Bangkok Embassy deals with a lot more applications than KL......They would be dealing with a lot more overstays, fraudulent applications etc etc......Therefore they would be a lot more stringent with their processing than KL

If they do not deal with each individual case I do not feel they are doing their job. This should apply equally to whichever embassy they are in.

[gburns57au]

Could I suggest that the Bangkok Embassy deals with a lot more applications than KL......They would be dealing with a lot more overstays, fraudulent applications etc etc......Therefore they would be a lot more stringent with their processing than KL

If they do not deal with each individual case I do not feel they are doing their job. This should apply equally to whichever embassy they are in.

I never said they didnt......just that their processes may be more stringent......each case is judged on its own merits....they may just look harder at each application than their KL counterparts.

[Chris Lawrence]

Hey GB you sound as your on the payroll.

The fact is the work load between Bangkok and Canberra would be more than likely the same, if not greater in OZ. Unless there is some detailed processing information that is available not on the public domain and is known to only a few, then someone prove the fact that one agency in one country is working harder than the other.

If an answer can be got in 10 minutes as described by David, and no one takes up the slack in Bangkok; don't you believe there is a problem?

The other issues may be cultural, lazy, indignant, or are really controlling the process to suit themselves. Now if some of the girls have been in Bangkok for 10+ years, why haven't they got a handle on it yet. That is their stringent process is more about time wasting and knocking back the application because a i wasn't doted the way they wanted it. So if your serious you will appeal. Is this what we are talking about?

Maybe we need a rating system on who is the best in Bangkok DIAC; get their names and put it out there in the community.

I don't see any racist slur here, I just see the development of compassion and the stifling of thought on something that is a real cultural problem.

Remember, this is one of the most traumatic times in our life we may go thru. Many, and I assume males have been thru the mill one or two times, have had terrible relationships and at the point of finding love and happiness. We don't need the process further denigrated by our own in-sensitiveness because I may part my hair on the left and you on the right.

To view the problems I think the Commonwealth Ombudsman supplies the level of complaint received by the way different OZ DIAC around the world fall short in service to customers.

I think David's last point on timing does show a lack of service. Then its about staff levels? How do you know the difference in staff levels? Statements should be backed with fact.

Just my 2 bobs worth

Chris

[david96]

The criteria for a visa to Australia is exactly the same in KL as it is in Bangkok.

It is based on the Migration Regulations and the PAM3.

Some countries are regarded as high risk for visa overstays in Australia. Those countries cannot get an ETA, they have to apply for a visa at an Embassy.

If one meets the criteria one gets the visa.

The Thai staff at the Embassy are employed locally at a different salary level to their Australian counterparts and they are not "First" or "Second" secretaries. However they can sign documents "for" which means "on behalf of" the above.

Because the applicants are Thai nationals DIAC needs to interview persons who only speak Thai, and that is there main purpose. and English is mandatory.

This gives them enormous power over a Thai national, but none over an Australian.

Remember, we are dealing with social status and rank in Thai society plus the "loss of face"

issue. Thais will not question any authority, an Australian will. A Thai if he or she does not

know will not ask anyone higher up for an answer or interpretation of a rule. An Australian

will.

We also have the right to contact the Commonwealth Ombudsman and we can also contact our local Federal Member or Mininister if we do not get a satisfactory answer.

It is a problem of "culture" Thais accept social status in the workplace, Australians do not.

We use the term "get a second opinion" when unsure. Thais do not.

I would also like to add that Mason45 has a very good case and his is not an isolated one

Also a good post from #39. (Chris Lawrence)

[fishhooks]

Very good post David, agree with you re the chain of command, not dare to go above the first point of refusal type of thing.

My TW is often amazed at how often I speak up when I feel something is wrong and may I add how often I succeed with this attitude.

Don't ever sit back, with Taxation, Immigration, Centrelink or anyone else if you are being wronged or pushed to one side.

[fantaasia]

About 4 years ago i received a 90 day visa for my beautiful Thai wife to visit my family back in Ireland. When we arrived at Dublin Airport a disheveled female Immigration Official, who could not disguise her contempt, gave her only 12 days to get out.

On the 11th day we gladly obliged her.

So its not just the racist Aussies. Look at the bright side though. If your wife was Aboriginal she probably would have been sterilized on the spot and then frog-marched off to rot in a rat invested, tin-roofed concent-ration camp somewhere in the outback..

[Sporting Dog]

On the whole the embassy in BKK has been OK for me - 2 tourist, 1 spouse and some other visa issues. However on a couple of occasions I have had problems, and a couple of the employees (Thai women) have had really unhelpful attitudes. However I have had nothing but great service from DIAC in Australia.

I wonder about the BKK embassy. In my most recent dealings - which required making an appointment for a replacement visa into a new passport - I had to send numerous emails (as suggested by DIAC) and finally state that I would contact DIAC in Australia if I didn't get a reply....I got one within the hour. So I don't think workload is the problem.

Thailand is a great place for a holiday...and I think this may be part of the explanation for the embassy. Whatever the reason, I can't imagine any Australian manager, CEO etc would be happy with the feedback that it gets.....there doesn't seem to be a culture of service in the place.

[Chris Lawrence]

Good post David. That is what I understood you to have meant in the first place.

Social status is a form of discrimination. Some countries use it to dominate. I picked this up when I went to the interviews with DIAC in BKK.

DIAC in OZ has been fantastic, will always answer the question with logic and intelligence. Fortunately we don't suffer with the social class thing when dealing with these people onshore.

Workload should have been improved with the transfer of visa applications to the outsourcing company in Bangkok. Daylight has always got to follow night. Sometimes you will just get treated like a mushroom.

I don't think so................

[Mason45]

Thanks everyone for your views on this subject, I still can't come to terms with the the wide difference between the Aust Embassy in Bangkok and their counterparts in Kuala Lumpur, after all both Embassies are supposed to operate under the same guidelines. The letter my wife got when her application was refused was rather confusing even for me. It stated that she was classed as not being genuine because she didnt satisfy one or more rules set down for a 676 visa. The clauses were as follows : A. Personal, financial, employment or other commitments which may induce the applicant to return to there country of usual residence. B. Circumstances which may induce the applicant not to return to the country of their usual residence. ie. military service, unemployment, economic situation, civil disruption including war and political upheaval. C. The credibility of the applicant. D. The purpose of the applicants visit. E. Info in the application which may suggest the applicant wont abide by the visa conditions. F. Non compliance or breach/es of immigration laws by the applicant on previous visas.

I still own my own home in Australia so I wouldnt need to pay rent, I have a substantial sum in my superannuation, I draw AU$600 per week tax free. Ive always made it mandatory for my wife to have travel insurance on previous visas to Australia. My wife is debt free in Thailand and her 2 children are married. On previous visits to Australia my wife has never made any attempts to go to work and shes always returned to Thailand prior to the expiry date on her visa. They say that every application is treated on its merits, thats not correct as four Aussie friends who are legally married to Thai women the same as me were all told after the 2nd visa that it was a spouse visa or nothing but the difference with them was they decided to apply for a spouse visa and live in Australia whereas at this stage I prefer to live in Thailand. To be warned about the consequences in regards to something that may never happen doesnt really seem like every application being treated on its merits. Another point is which of the 676 visa clause/s deemed my wife not to be a genuine applicant, its really hard to rectify a problem when the official letter stated that it maybe one or more reasons why her visa was refused, previous enquiries have all received the same reply, insisting that my wife must apply for a spouse visa.

[bridge]

Mason,

How many tourist visas has your wife been issued over the last few years, and how long has she spent in Australia (total time) on those visas.

[Mason45]

Mason,

How many tourist visas has your wife been issued over the last few years, and how long has she spent in Australia (total time) on those visas.

Bridge, my wife has been to Australia 2 times, firstly on a 3 months visa and then a 6 months visa, she hasn't been back to Australia for several years. I understand the immigration department has the sole right to determine whether the applicant is genuine or not but to issue my wife with 2 visas and then refuse the third application seems rather strange to me and to send an official letter stating that because she didn't satisfy one or more terms relating to a 676 visa is really vague, couldn't they've given a specific reason/s as to their refusal so we have something to work on to sort this matter out. She could test the water and apply for a visa right now but I'm not going to keep on chasing good money after bad forfeiting application deposits unless I'm sure she has a realistic chance of obtaining a visa.

[bridge]

Mason,

How many tourist visas has your wife been issued over the last few years, and how long has she spent in Australia (total time) on those visas.

Bridge, my wife has been to Australia 2 times, firstly on a 3 months visa and then a 6 months visa, she hasn't been back to Australia for several years. I understand the immigration department has the sole right to determine whether the applicant is genuine or not but to issue my wife with 2 visas and then refuse the third application seems rather strange to me and to send an official letter stating that because she didn't satisfy one or more terms relating to a 676 visa is really vague, couldn't they've given a specific reason/s as to their refusal so we have something to work on to sort this matter out. She could test the water and apply for a visa right now but I'm not going to keep on chasing good money after bad forfeiting application deposits unless I'm sure she has a realistic chance of obtaining a visa.

Mason,

I am in total agreance with you. I was thinking along the lines that they (DIAC) may have thought that your wife was not a 'genuine visitor' because of the previous visas and the amount of time spent in Australia, but the time frames you have stated certainly do not suggest that would be a consideration.

If you don't mind, what did you tick for Q.2 on the 48R (3,6 or 12 months), and what did you write re Q.21.

[PEP]

Mason,

How many tourist visas has your wife been issued over the last few years, and how long has she spent in Australia (total time) on those visas.

Bridge, my wife has been to Australia 2 times, firstly on a 3 months visa and then a 6 months visa, she hasn't been back to Australia for several years. I understand the immigration department has the sole right to determine whether the applicant is genuine or not but to issue my wife with 2 visas and then refuse the third application seems rather strange to me and to send an official letter stating that because she didn't satisfy one or more terms relating to a 676 visa is really vague, couldn't they've given a specific reason/s as to their refusal so we have something to work on to sort this matter out. She could test the water and apply for a visa right now but I'm not going to keep on chasing good money after bad forfeiting application deposits unless I'm sure she has a realistic chance of obtaining a visa.

Mason, Again I will offer my previous post. I probably will not help you but you can see that, as stated by yourself and others everyone does not get similar treatment. All this has now caused me some concern as we will be applying again for the ninth year in a row for her to be with me in Australia at Christmas.

"I don't know why you got a knock-back but in my case My Thai Ladyfriend (not legally married) has had eight annual, successive 3 Month Visas, Multiple entry, after the first single entry one.(which really gives 15 Months use.) Everytime she stayed the full three months. Last visit was February this year. We have never had the slighest problem at Bangkok Embassy and latterly the Visa Centre.

My income is an Australian Pension, I have a House in Australia, She has enough money in the Bank for her own support if things went wrong whilst in Australia. She has a House, some Land and Family here in Thailand. Her only income is via my ATM. These factors I believe are necessary for your Wife to obtain a Tourist visa."

[harrry]

"I don't know why you got a knock-back but in my case My Thai Ladyfriend (not legally married) has had eight annual, successive 3 Month Visas, Multiple entry, after the first single entry one.(which really gives 15 Months use.) Everytime she stayed the full three months. Last visit was February this year. We have never had the slighest problem at Bangkok Embassy and latterly the Visa Centre.

My income is an Australian Pension, I have a House in Australia, She has enough money in the Bank for her own support if things went wrong whilst in Australia. She has a House, some Land and Family here in Thailand. Her only income is via my ATM. These factors I believe are necessary for your Wife to obtain a Tourist visa."

This is the reason for concern. If you have recieved these it should be evident that it is possible and the OP deserves a full and complete explanation of why his wife was refused. Being married should not affect this, if anything it should be the other way round.