CASE STUDIES

CASE STUDY 1: SUBCLASS 500 STUDENT VISA

In November 2017, a client approached Transmigra Visa Specialists to determine how best to bring her son to Australia on a Student Visa.  Before contacting Transmigra, the client’s son had already faced a visa refusal through his application with another agency. One of the issues was his marriage to a woman who was a citizen of a high-risk country. When applying for his Australian Student Visa, his wife attempted to come with him Australia as an accompanying member of the family. The visa application was refused on the grounds that the applicant did not meet the genuine temporary entrant requirement. Additionally, there were discrepancies in the applicant’s employment and travel history. 

Transmigra worked with the client and their son to lodge a new Student Visa (Subclass 500). After carefully reviewing the case, a decision ready application was lodged directly in response to the previous Visa refusal. After submitting the application in January 2018, the Visa was granted in February 2018 - only one month later.

Using a reputable firm to submit a decision ready and indisputable application can reduce the timeframe for your Visa application process. 

CASE STUDY 2: SUBCLASS 173 CONTRIBUTORY TEMPORARY VISA

The applicant’s family approached Transmigra to apply for the Subclass 173 Contributory Temporary Visa which would allow the applicant’s mother to remain in Australia for a limited period of time. Due to the applicant’s mother’s failing health, the family decided not to proceed with a Permanent visa at the early application stage and instead applied for a Temporary Visa (Subclass 173). While submitting the application to the Department of Immigration, it was indicated on the forms that the applicant was applying for the Subclass 173, however it incorrectly recorded on the Department’s system as the Subclass 143 Contributory Permanent Visa due to administrative error.


After thorough investigation of the client’s file, it became clear that the applicant had ticked the box for the Subclass 173 and the Department’s record was incorrect. Additional information was provided to the Department which included copies of the Form 80 and Form 956 as a clear evidence of the applicant’s intention to apply for the Subclass 173 visa. The Department of Immigration subsequently acknowledged its error and amended its decision in the applicant's favour. 

Using a reputable firm to review a negative decision by the Department of Immigration can be the difference between success and failure.