Let me share with you, how a 99.99% visa application was so close to being granted, which included a child, was refused because of the letter ‘h’. That’s right, the letter ‘h’.
Let me be very clear. With 24 years of experience, lodging thousands of Filipino visa applications to Australia, securing tens of thousands of visa grants ranging from visitors, parent, partner, child, last remaining relative, SkillSelect visa applications, ‘I have never seen such a technically harsh decision’ from the Department of Home Affairs, which was roundly explained this way:
‘It is important to note that if a document was provided with spelling errors this could be resolved during processing. The issue remains that according to the issuer, the name on the documents presented to the Department does not match the name that appears in their records. You did not provide any statement from the Parish to support your claim that the copy that you provided was a sample document. While it is noted that the discrepancy in the spelling is minor, Section 97 of the Migration Act defines a document that has been altered by a person who does not have the authority to so as, a bogus document.’
Let me just assist you to understand how this is viewed by the department by including Section 97 of the Migration Act directly below:
MIGRATION ACT 1958 – SECTION 97
Interpretation
In this Subdivision:
“application form”, in relation to a non-citizen, means a form on which a non-citizen applies for a visa, being a form, that regulations made for the purposes of section 46 allow to be used for making the application.
“passenger card” has the meaning given by subsection 506(2) and, for the purposes of section 115, includes any document provided for by regulations under paragraph 504(1)(c).
Note: Bogus document is defined in subsection 5(1).
Subsection 5(1)
“bogus document”, in relation to a person, means a document that the Minister reasonably suspects is a document that:
(a) purports to have been, but was not, issued in respect of the person; or
(b) is counterfeit or has been altered by a person who does not have authority to do so; or
(c) was obtained because of a false or misleading statement, whether or not made knowingly.
The Department of Home Affairs highlighted the following stance and is a very good reminder to anyone contemplating on lodging any visa applications to Australia from the Philippines:
Public Interest Criteria (PIC) 4020, is intended to significantly increase the level of integrity in visa applications by providing a strong disincentive to those considering giving, or causing to be given, a bogus document or information that is false or misleading in a material particular. It also requires applicants to satisfy the delegate as to their identity.
The Filipino visa applicant presented valid documents and accurate information regarding all her and her child’s identity, however, it appeared that when her Baptismal Certificate was organised in the past by her parents, a letter ‘h’ was included in her first name, unbeknownst to any of them.
To cut to the chase, we always explain to the Filipino visa applicant from the initial assessment stage, to be honest and up-front with us and assure them that we have all the legal remedies and solutions for any discrepancies that may appear on any of their identity documents and to always raise this with us as soon as possible so we can properly address any issues before lodging them to the Department of Home Affairs.
Unfortunately, the department did the following:
‘The Department conducted checks on these documents and was informed by the issuer that the spelling of the name on two documents did not match their records. Their records show that the spelling of your name is Xx Xhxxxxxxx Xxxxx while the copy that you provided show your name to be Xx Xxxxxxxxx Xxxxx. It is evident in this document that the spelling of your first name was altered, removing the ‘h’ to match the spelling of your first name in your birth certificate and your passport.’
The department went on to state:
‘You were provided with an opportunity to respond to the information and submitted a declaration in which you claimed to have taken all the steps necessary and that to the best of your knowledge you had secured a true and correct copy of the certificates. You went on to explain that you have seen other records with minor spelling mistakes.’
The moral to this decision is very simple and can be summed up this way:
The late motivational speaker, Jim Rohn, once said,
“There are two types of pain you will go through in life. The pain of discipline and the pain of regret. Discipline weighs ounces, while regret weighs a tonne.”
Which one will you choose?
We now have 28 days to determine whether to challenge this decision through the Administrative Appels Tribunal (AAT) or Lodge a fresh application, eventually.
If you are contemplating on lodging a visa application to Australia from the Philippines, why not get yourselves initially assessed for FREE, have the discipline to provide us accurate information and documents (no matter what the issues look like), acquire our assured Service Agreement, avail of our remarkable migration service and receive ‘a written prospect of success’ and migrate to Australia, sooner rather than later.
Mabuhay.
