# Mark Northam...re-PIC 4020



## dunan (Oct 5, 2012)

Hi Mark....not sure how much of a test case we were in regards to this issue, seeing it was only implemented in July, and everyone telling us we were in deep chit, we took both embassy and phil departments on ourselves.....in the end they relented and our visa 100 was granted after 8 months of jumping thru hoops.....

Thanks mate for your input but if you are prepared to fight then it can be done.....


----------



## rajesh.149 (Sep 9, 2013)

*Adverse Information Received : PIC 4020*

I have sent an explanation for an Adverse Information received and this is a PIC 4020. The Adverse info. is about the Current Employer Reference Letter. I had provided a Mail-endorsement by my immediate Manager as an evidence for reference for my current employer. My Agent/Consultant, instead of sending this Mail-endorsement, forged this Reference letter, to put it on company Letter-head and also screwed up my joining date. The Agent has done this without my knowledge. When the Employee verification happened, my current employer investigated with me and my agent about this bogus document and I was shocked to find this. My Agent although has accepted the mistake and my employer had been able to establish that the document was forged by the agent. I am still working for this employer, and now it is almost more than 4 yrs. In my explanation to DIAC, I have clearly stated that the said document was in-fact forged by my agent without my knowledge, and I have mail-trail evidences to prove the same. Also the investigation by my employer has already established the wrong actions by my agent. Hope DIAC would be satisfied with my explanation. Please let me know your thoughts.

Regards
R


----------



## dunan (Oct 5, 2012)

Yeah...mine too was about fraud that was committed by a third party...even though we proved to embassy this fact it fell on deaf ears...guilty till proven innocent, so its up to you to prove it.....at least in oz there is some system of justice in place, trying to get accountability....try fronting a corrupt judge in Moslem territory n asking why?

Anyway the waiver worked but it took months of continuous ''requests for further docs'' good luck, im sure you will be fine...


----------



## MarkNortham (Dec 19, 2012)

Hi Rajesh -

That certainly seems like a reasonable explanation, especially since you are still employed by that employer! Problem is, DIAC does not care who did what, the applicant still is held responsible for anything submitted under his/her name. PIC4020 is nasty because there is no need to "prove" one's guilt in order to have this condition put into play. As Dunan said, trying to clear your name when PIC4020 is brought up by a case officer can take months and months of work. In that respect, I hope if you used a registered migration agent that you filed appropriate charges against him/her. If you used an unregistered agent, that leaves you very little recourse against the agent other than whatever your local laws allow.

I hope this works out for you - your explanation certainly seems logical and reasonable - the key will be seeing what DIAC has to say and their position on it. Please advise if I can assist further -

Best,

Mark Northam


----------



## dunan (Oct 5, 2012)

Raj...I would let Mark handle it...believe me its what I would have done if I could....under the circumstances we had no choice but take up the fight even if our hands were tied behind our backs.....n we won...so make it easier on yourself..


----------



## rajesh.149 (Sep 9, 2013)

MarkNortham said:


> Hi Rajesh -
> 
> That certainly seems like a reasonable explanation, especially since you are still employed by that employer! Problem is, DIAC does not care who did what, the applicant still is held responsible for anything submitted under his/her name. PIC4020 is nasty because there is no need to "prove" one's guilt in order to have this condition put into play. As Dunan said, trying to clear your name when PIC4020 is brought up by a case officer can take months and months of work. In that respect, I hope if you used a registered migration agent that you filed appropriate charges against him/her. If you used an unregistered agent, that leaves you very little recourse against the agent other than whatever your local laws allow.
> 
> ...


Thanks Mark,

The agent is not a MARA registered agent. I have already terminated my contract with this agent and am contemplating legal proceedings against them .. and yes within the jurisdiction of this country. Let me know how can you help me.. should we wait for the response from DIAC for the clarification I have already sent and then take the next step. Please let me know your views based on your vast experience.
Rgds
Raj ....


----------



## MarkNortham (Dec 19, 2012)

Hi Raj -

It could go either way - you've responded to the natural justice letter which named PIC4020 and provided your explanation, so unless you wanted to provide any additional materials prior to the decision being made (if there is any additional info, etc to be provided), then it becomes a matter for the case officer to decide. Unfortunately as you're outside Australia you will have no MRT review rights, so the case officer's judgement essentially becomes final.

The issue now becomes whether you hope that your explanation will be accepted and you'll get a positive decision, or withdraw the application. But as is the case with PIC4020, simply withdrawing the application will not remove that from your record, but withdrawing could make it easier to lodge another application. A PIC4020 refusal results in a 3-year ban on applications for any Australian visa that has PIC4020 as one of its conditions (and many do). I have not seen the case officer's original letter with the PIC4020 accusations, nor your response, so it's difficult for me to address the matter in detail.

Hope this helps -

Best,

Mark Northam

PS - Here's the complete text of PIC4020 for reference:
_
4020

(1) There is no evidence before the Minister that the applicant has given, or caused to be given, to the Minister, an officer, the Migration Review Tribunal, a relevant assessing authority or a Medical Officer of the Commonwealth, a bogus document or information that is false or misleading in a material particular in relation to:
(a) the application for the visa; or
(b) a visa that the applicant held in the period of 12 months before the application was made.

(2) The Minister is satisfied that during the period:
(a) starting 3 years before the application was made; and
(b) ending when the Minister makes a decision to grant or refuse the application;
the applicant and each member of a family unit of the applicant has not been refused a visa because of a failure to satisfy the criteria in subclause (1).

(3) To avoid doubt, subclauses (1) and (2) apply whether or not the Minister became aware of the bogus document or information that is false or misleading in a material particular because of information given by the applicant.

(4) The Minister may waive the requirements of any or all of paragraphs (1)(a) or (b) and subclause (2) if satisfied that:
(a) compelling circumstances that affect the interests of Australia; or
(b) compassionate or compelling circumstances that affect the interests of an Australian citizen, an Australian permanent resident or an eligible New Zealand citizen;
justify the granting of the visa.

(5) In this clause:

information that is false or misleading in a material particular means information that is:
(a) false or misleading at the time it is given; and
(b) relevant to any of the criteria the Minister may consider when making a decision on an application, whether or not the decision is made because of that information.

Note Regulation 1.03 defines bogus document as having the same meaning as in section 97 of the Act._


----------



## rajesh.149 (Sep 9, 2013)

MarkNortham said:


> Hi Raj -
> 
> It could go either way - you've responded to the natural justice letter which named PIC4020 and provided your explanation, so unless you wanted to provide any additional materials prior to the decision being made (if there is any additional info, etc to be provided), then it becomes a matter for the case officer to decide. Unfortunately as you're outside Australia you will have no MRT review rights, so the case officer's judgement essentially becomes final.
> 
> ...


Thanks for your response;

Just trying to understand, on the clarification I have sent .. so who will review this response (is it a call that Case Officer takes?) or is this something that goes to a wider group of people and they take decision on my clarification/response to Natural Justice. Also, if you can tell me how long does this take in terms of turnaround .. How long this wait should be ?

Regards
Raj


----------



## MarkNortham (Dec 19, 2012)

Hi Raj -

Sorry if I was confusing - "natural justice" is an Australian law principal that says, basically, that if negative information is being considered for use against you, that information needs to be provided to you and you need to be given an opportunity to respond to it, and your response must be considered by the decision maker. In your scenario, I expect that the case officer and perhaps his/her supervisor would be the ones making the decision.

In terms of turnaround, hard to say, typically within 30 days but can be longer.

Hope this helps -

Best,

Mark Northam


----------



## rajesh.149 (Sep 9, 2013)

*Adverse Information Received : PIC 4020*

Thanks a lot Mark,

I can only wait .. and as you said, since I am not in Australia, if the decision is negative, I cannot take this further, have I understood correct.

Regards
Raj ...


----------



## MarkNortham (Dec 19, 2012)

Correct - the key now is to see whether the case officer is satisfied with your explanation or not, and see if/how the case officer decides to apply PIC4020 in light of your response.

Given the importance of this, if you'd like to contact me directly (website in signature has a contact page) and send me their letter and your response, I'd be happy to have a look and give you my thoughts if that's of any interest - no charge!

Best of luck!

Best,

Mark Northam


----------



## ProblemChild (Mar 12, 2013)

MarkNortham said:


> Hi Raj -
> 
> Sorry if I was confusing - "natural justice" is an Australian law principal that says, basically, that if negative information is being considered for use against you, that information needs to be provided to you and you need to be given an opportunity to respond to it, and your response must be considered by the decision maker. In your scenario, I expect that the case officer and perhaps his/her supervisor would be the ones making the decision.
> 
> ...


Hi Mark

I had a case several years ago in which DIAC had failed to send a natural justice letter. Apparently, sending a natural justice letter was merely a normal practice of DIAC and not a legal requirement when making a visa decision, at least at that time. So MRT simply noted the failure but did not care at all!!!

PC


----------



## MarkNortham (Dec 19, 2012)

Hi PC -

Good point - however not providing natural justice has been proven in a number of court cases to be a legal mistake which can result in big problems for DIAC. I've noticed they seem to be very careful these days to provide NJ to avoid future vulnerabilities.

Best,

Mark Northam


----------



## baba123 (Dec 19, 2013)

MarkNortham said:


> Hi Raj -
> 
> Sorry if I was confusing - "natural justice" is an Australian law principal that says, basically, that if negative information is being considered for use against you, that information needs to be provided to you and you need to be given an opportunity to respond to it, and your response must be considered by the decision maker. In your scenario, I expect that the case officer and perhaps his/her supervisor would be the ones making the decision.
> 
> ...


Hi Mark,

Need your help and advise. Today i have received a mail from my CO stating that :Adverse information received during our routine checking in your Employment verification.A natural justice letter will be sent early 2014." What should i interpret according to the mail.

iam also worried that by this should i expect that there is no chance of getting PR for me. According to you what would be the ratio that people who get this king of letter of getting their visa.

Kindly reply about this and make me understand about the process in this regard.


----------



## lincsus (Jun 18, 2013)

In my opinion, it all boils down to a simple question - Did you lie or fabricate some parts of your employment history? If not, then you should be able to provide strong evidence and respond to the nautral justice letter. The department will give you details of the adverse information and you should respond to that with proof. It should not be a problem.

But if you have claimed some employment history which is not exactly truthful and the department has information about that, then I don't see any hope for your application.


----------



## baba123 (Dec 19, 2013)

lincsus said:


> In my opinion, it all boils down to a simple question - Did you lie or fabricate some parts of your employment history? If not, then you should be able to provide strong evidence and respond to the nautral justice letter. The department will give you details of the adverse information and you should respond to that with proof. It should not be a problem.
> 
> But if you have claimed some employment history which is not exactly truthful and the department has information about that, then I don't see any hope for your application.


Hi Lincsus,

Thankyou for the reply iam very confused now as i have already provided the bank statements of 4 years and 3 years of pay slips and the appraisel letters and roles and responsibilities os all the companies and the offer leter nad appointment letter etc every piece of paper i have .

See what if and employer wantedly gives the false information to immigration in that case what would be the scope and what kind of documents will help me to submit to DIBP after i have been given a Natural Justice Letter.

Requesting Seniors to guide me in this situation.


----------



## MarkNortham (Dec 19, 2012)

Hi Baba -

First, this does not mean the end of your visa application - sometimes these letters are triggered by mistakes or misunderstandings that occur when DIBP checks employment references. I have one client for a student visa where DIBP apparently misdialed the parent's mobile phone number, the person who answered knew nothing about the applicant or her parent, and out goes a PIC4020 letter with all the usual threats. We ended up submitting the parent's phone bill showing no call attempted that day, and piles of documents evidencing that it truly was the parent's phone number that was listed on the application. 3 months later and they are still to respond to our evidence, and of course no visa and the student's study plans have been put on hold indefinitely.

You'll have to wait to see what specific issues they have with your employment documents or information, then respond to those with as much evidence as you can put together. You may want to consider professional assistance depending on your circumstances when it comes time to putting together your response to the allegations made by DIBP in the natural justice letter, etc.

Hope this helps -

Best,

Mark Northam


----------



## battulas78 (Oct 22, 2013)

Dear Mark,

Greetings and Happy New Year.

I have a query regarding Statutory Declaration for Roles and Responsibilities i provided to NSW SS.

I happened to send original declaration to NSW SS. Can i send a Current Dated statutory Declartion to DIBP from a Different Supervisor ?? Would that be an issue ??? Does DIBP check with NSW signatories on declartion on the ones sent to them ??

I am bit confused. Your thoughts are much valued and appreciated.

Thanks

Santhosh


----------



## MarkNortham (Dec 19, 2012)

Hi Santosh -

Not sure on this one - I think it's unlikely that NSW SS and DIBP exchange notes on evidence provided, but probably not unheard of. If you're not able to get a further employer ref letter from the same supervisor, I would think that a different supervisor would not be a problem as long as DIBP can call them on the phone and fully verify everything. DIBP is getting very aggressive about doing this, so it's vital that everything be correct on the letter as compared to your EOI, etc.

Hope this helps -

Best,

Mark Northam


----------



## battulas78 (Oct 22, 2013)

MarkNortham said:


> Hi Santosh -
> 
> Not sure on this one - I think it's unlikely that NSW SS and DIBP exchange notes on evidence provided, but probably not unheard of. If you're not able to get a further employer ref letter from the same supervisor, I would think that a different supervisor would not be a problem as long as DIBP can call them on the phone and fully verify everything. DIBP is getting very aggressive about doing this, so it's vital that everything be correct on the letter as compared to your EOI, etc.
> 
> ...


Thanks Mark.

But is it mandatory to provide statutory declaration of roles and respinsibilities again to DIBP ??

Or is it ok if the same on a plain white sheet from supervisor along with appointment, appraisal, relieving letters, payslips, bank statements and tax returns ??

Thanks for your help.

Regards

Santhosh


----------



## MarkNortham (Dec 19, 2012)

Hi Santosh -

The employer reference letter, in whatever format it's delivered, plus proof of payment are DIBP requirements. They will not leave it to the skills assessor in terms of validating employment and do their own verification, etc. DIBP will generally defer to the skills assessor in terms of technical questions of whether the employment is closely related to the ANZSCO occupation you're applying under, but DIBP will look at other aspects of the employment as well as overall data verification, etc. They generally do a more thorough job of the verification part (ie, dates worked, whether paid, etc) than the skills assessors do in many cases.

Plain white sheet from supervisor is not a good idea - DIBP wants an official letter on company letterhead for work references - if you're planning on submitting anything else (ie, stat dec from a former manager no longer employed at the company, etc) you should explain why you're doing this and why it is the only possible option available to you, and be ready for some intense investigatory work by DIBP to verify, especially if you're from one of the countries that has experiencing a high level of fraudulent documents currently.

Best,

Mark Northam


----------



## battulas78 (Oct 22, 2013)

MarkNortham said:


> Hi Santosh -
> 
> The employer reference letter, in whatever format it's delivered, plus proof of payment are DIBP requirements. They will not leave it to the skills assessor in terms of validating employment and do their own verification, etc. DIBP will generally defer to the skills assessor in terms of technical questions of whether the employment is closely related to the ANZSCO occupation you're applying under, but DIBP will look at other aspects of the employment as well as overall data verification, etc. They generally do a more thorough job of the verification part (ie, dates worked, whether paid, etc) than the skills assessors do in many cases.
> 
> ...


Hi Mark

Thanks for your detailed reply.

Just one clarification, by employment reference, does DIBP refer to Roles and Responsibilities Or a letter stating joining and relieving date and Designation such as relieving/experience letter.

I have reliving/Experience letters of all organisations on the letter head along with appointment, hike letters, payslips and tax returns.

Thanks for your time and inputs.

Regards

Santhosh


----------



## MarkNortham (Dec 19, 2012)

Hi Santosh -

I expect what you have may work. Many organisations will not list duties/responsibilities in reference letters, and only list start/end dates, job title, full time vs part time, etc. Typically DIBP will contact the writer of the letter directly if they have any issues about duties/responsibilities, as will the skills assessors if they want more info.

Best,

Mark Northam


----------



## battulas78 (Oct 22, 2013)

Hi Mark

Thanks a lot for your clarification.

Wishing you and your family a Very Happy New Year.

Best

Santhosh


----------



## MarkNortham (Dec 19, 2012)

Thanks - very best to you and your family as well!

Mark


----------



## delvydavis (Oct 25, 2013)

Hi People,
After reading this thread, I am in a dilemma that what will happen to my visa process 

My story goes like this:
My first job! I was working in a firm past in 1997 as a "trainee technician". I worked there more than a year and I have only the reference letter which I got while leaving from there in 1998. But unfortunately, now that company is no more I believe. Because, when I search for that company, except the name of the company, all other details are different, such as address, phone no, owner, etc.

So my doubt is, when the DIBP do verification of the document I provided, either they could not find this company on the phone numbers/address provided in the reference letter, or if they find it by googling they will assume, I gave false information. Do you think this may lead to PIC-4020 situation?

I do not have even the documents like payslip or bank account statements for that job 
Kindly advice

Delvy


----------



## MarkNortham (Dec 19, 2012)

Hi Delvy -

You may not want to claim that job for points on a skilled visa as it was over 10 years ago, no proof of payment available, and no way to verify employment since the company is no longer in the same form it was. 

Hope this helps -

Best,

Mark Northam


----------



## delvydavis (Oct 25, 2013)

Thanks a lot Mark for directing me to the "points on skilled employment" part in SS which needs only 8years to show up for claiming the 15 points. 

Happy New Year!

Delvy


----------



## baba123 (Dec 19, 2013)

MarkNortham said:


> Hi Baba -
> 
> First, this does not mean the end of your visa application - sometimes these letters are triggered by mistakes or misunderstandings that occur when DIBP checks employment references. I have one client for a student visa where DIBP apparently misdialed the parent's mobile phone number, the person who answered knew nothing about the applicant or her parent, and out goes a PIC4020 letter with all the usual threats. We ended up submitting the parent's phone bill showing no call attempted that day, and piles of documents evidencing that it truly was the parent's phone number that was listed on the application. 3 months later and they are still to respond to our evidence, and of course no visa and the student's study plans have been put on hold indefinitely.
> 
> ...


Hi,

Thank You for the detailed reply on my query feeling some relaxed.Iam sorry to ask you this but cant hold any as per your experience how common is this letter and what could be the chances to get through out of this MESS. As my my CO told that she will send a natural letter in early 2014 when can i expect it it this month or it may be till march also.

One more query my agent have lost his Email password and could not retrive it and that had been blocked and was told that that that cannot be retrived in any circumstances. Now iam worried that DIBP sends all communications on behalf of me to that Email id and now its not working.How can i or my agent inform DIBP on this and change the email address which they have should we senf to case officer email and let them know or is there is any oficial way we follow on this.

Thanks In advance....

Baba


----------



## baba123 (Dec 19, 2013)

*About Natural justuce Letter*



MarkNortham said:


> Hi Baba -
> 
> First, this does not mean the end of your visa application - sometimes these letters are triggered by mistakes or misunderstandings that occur when DIBP checks employment references. I have one client for a student visa where DIBP apparently misdialed the parent's mobile phone number, the person who answered knew nothing about the applicant or her parent, and out goes a PIC4020 letter with all the usual threats. We ended up submitting the parent's phone bill showing no call attempted that day, and piles of documents evidencing that it truly was the parent's phone number that was listed on the application. 3 months later and they are still to respond to our evidence, and of course no visa and the student's study plans have been put on hold indefinitely.
> 
> ...


----------



## bravo189 (Jan 27, 2014)

*189 application filling*

Hi Mark,

I have few queries on 189 application filling:

1. In the Employment section, I have entered 2 rows. 
1--> My Australian Employment is 5 years and above ( 15 points). and I Selected Yes and choose "5 years in the past 10 year" in the Duration of Australian Employment. All good no issues 
2--> My Indian Employment was 1 year 11months, though I cannot use it for any points, I have included that in my EOI and said it was in occupation list. So I have listed in 189 application. But the problem is, when I select yes to "Duration of overseas employment" and I couldn't see the option to select < 3 years. What should I do? If I didn't include in the application this might contradict my eoi data. What should I do?

2. In the Employment section, shall i put positions in the short form since the characters are limited. ? e.g. Instead of Assistant Systems Engineer/Information Technology Analyst/ Assistant Consultant to ASE/ITA/ASC?

3. In the Employment Section, I could see only 300 characters to fill my duties. Shall I cut short and brief the duties which i have mentioned employment reference letter?

4. In the "Have any of the applicants lived in a country other than the primary applicant's usual country of residence? " Since I stay in Australia, my usual country of residence would be Australia,. Prior to Australia I stayed only in India, so I should enter my India address only right?

Awaiting for your reply.

Thanks in advance...


----------



## MarkNortham (Dec 19, 2012)

Hi Bravo -

As this is not related to the subject of the thread (PIC4020), please repost as a new thread and I'd be happy to answer. Short answers: 1) that's because there are no points given for overseas employment < 3 yrs ; 2) No. Avoid abbreviations since the case officer may not understand them; 3) Suggest you make the most of the 300 char and/or include a supplemental document attached to the app if you absolutely cannot succinctly describe the duties in the 300 char; 4) Correct.

Best,

Mark Northam


----------



## MarkNortham (Dec 19, 2012)

Hi Baba -

No way to predict no. of days they will take to respond - like everything DIBP does, it takes as much time as it wants to to respond/decide/etc. Depends on workload, case officer scheduling, holidays, staffing decisions, etc. There are many checks, internal and external, that are part of PR visa applications - no way to tell how many still left to go. Sorry I don't have more specific info here!

Best,

Mark Northam


----------



## bravo189 (Jan 27, 2014)

Hi Mark,

Thanks for your reply.

I have posted the same query in the different thread. please find the title"Reg: 189 application filling"

1. so in that case, shall I select nominated as NO? But I have already put Yes in my EOI. In that case, will that be a problem?

2. So if I cannot enter abbreviations, then what can I put?

3. How can i attach the document to the app?

Please help me.

Thanks



MarkNortham said:


> Hi Bravo -
> 
> As this is not related to the subject of the thread (PIC4020), please repost as a new thread and I'd be happy to answer. Short answers: 1) that's because there are no points given for overseas employment < 3 yrs ; 2) No. Avoid abbreviations since the case officer may not understand them; 3) Suggest you make the most of the 300 char and/or include a supplemental document attached to the app if you absolutely cannot succinctly describe the duties in the 300 char; 4) Correct.
> 
> ...


----------



## MarkNortham (Dec 19, 2012)

See new thread "Ask Mark!" set up just for this reason - we'll see if that helps organise things!

1) Would need to look at your application in detail to answer this question.
2) See previous answer - "Asst" can be understood, but "A" as part of an abbreviation is open to all kinds of misunderstandings.
3) After you lodge and pay, you then can upload supporting docs

Best,

Mark Northam


----------



## baba123 (Dec 19, 2013)

lincsus said:


> In my opinion, it all boils down to a simple question - Did you lie or fabricate some parts of your employment history? If not, then you should be able to provide strong evidence and respond to the nautral justice letter. The department will give you details of the adverse information and you should respond to that with proof. It should not be a problem.
> 
> But if you have claimed some employment history which is not exactly truthful and the department has information about that, then I don't see any hope for your application.


Hi Lincsus,

I have replied to Co with all the evidences and got aknowledgement from co that received ur attachemnts will take a decision in comming weeks, is it common that this type of mails from co that the decesions will be this much fast.

i have provided all the documents for each query they raised in the letter and also a detailed letter explaining about the story of the verification call day.

Mark and yourself comments are required on my case.

Thank you


----------



## baba123 (Dec 19, 2013)

MarkNortham said:


> Hi Baba -
> 
> No way to predict no. of days they will take to respond - like everything DIBP does, it takes as much time as it wants to to respond/decide/etc. Depends on workload, case officer scheduling, holidays, staffing decisions, etc. There are many checks, internal and external, that are part of PR visa applications - no way to tell how many still left to go. Sorry I don't have more specific info here!
> 
> ...


Hi Mark,

Thank you for the quick response. In one day my case officer acknowledged that she received my reply mail on Natural justice Letter and a decession will be made in coming weeks. Can we take it as a good sign of her mail as i have very clearly organized the documents for all the queries raised with the explanation from me and my employer.

Hoping for the best.


----------



## MarkNortham (Dec 19, 2012)

Hi Baba -

Sorry, but I would not necessarily consider that acknowledging receipt is a good sign - it's certainly not a bad sign, but I fear you're reading too much into the acknowledgement. Time to be patient. Whenever PIC4020 comes up, you need to take the circumstances very, very seriously as it's serious business with DIBP and they don't fool around when it comes to this type of issue. Did you fully research the Migration Regulations and PAM3 policy on PIC4020 and how these are handled? Hope so, as that's the real meat of the issue. Remember that in many cases DIBP does not "believe" statements or assertions unless they are backed up with verifiable documentary evidence. And remember that the law, regulation and policy are the "rules of the game" that everybody - applicants, the DIBP and MRT - must adhere to. The strength of a PIC4020 response generally rests in 2 areas: how well the documentary evidence satisfies the concerns raised by the case officer, and how well the submission and evidence aligns with the regulations and DIBP policy on this issue.

Hope this helps -

Best,

Mark Northam



baba123 said:


> Hi Mark,
> 
> Thank you for the quick response. In one day my case officer acknowledged that she received my reply mail on Natural justice Letter and a decession will be made in coming weeks. Can we take it as a good sign of her mail as i have very clearly organized the documents for all the queries raised with the explanation from me and my employer.
> 
> Hoping for the best.


----------



## baba123 (Dec 19, 2013)

MarkNortham said:


> Hi Baba -
> 
> Sorry, but I would not necessarily consider that acknowledging receipt is a good sign - it's certainly not a bad sign, but I fear you're reading too much into the acknowledgement. Time to be patient. Whenever PIC4020 comes up, you need to take the circumstances very, very seriously as it's serious business with DIBP and they don't fool around when it comes to this type of issue. Did you fully research the Migration Regulations and PAM3 policy on PIC4020 and how these are handled? Hope so, as that's the real meat of the issue. Remember that in many cases DIBP does not "believe" statements or assertions unless they are backed up with verifiable documentary evidence. And remember that the law, regulation and policy are the "rules of the game" that everybody - applicants, the DIBP and MRT - must adhere to. The strength of a PIC4020 response generally rests in 2 areas: how well the documentary evidence satisfies the concerns raised by the case officer, and how well the submission and evidence aligns with the regulations and DIBP policy on this issue.
> 
> ...


Hi Mark,

Thank you for the reply,Yes i was too much reading into acknowledgement mail from co i can understand the importance of this stage. i have replied to them with all the documentary evidences i have collected to the queries as they have raised 5 to 6 queries about employment i have collected the max proofs which are verifiable on line to DIBP. Am with you that i have to be very very serious about this stage as this would be the final decision tool to DIBP.

In my letter they have mentioned the call date different where as my employer received call on other day.I have clearly explained in my letter about the call date written wrongly in the letter will it create any problem as we are pointing out about their faults.


----------



## MarkNortham (Dec 19, 2012)

Note sure if it would cause a problem - would need to carefully review your submission package to give you any advice regarding it.

Best,

Mark Northam


----------



## Casper (Apr 28, 2014)

Hi Mark,

I just came across to this thread as I was looking for some help regarding 4020.

I applied for 190 visa in WA in August 2013 and recently I have received an email stated that they found some unfavorable information about my partner's job reference letter back in May 2012 but he was already granted 485 in Feb 2012 but they never came back with this founding, now the CO making it issue with my application.

According to the immi letter when they contacted my partner's employer back In May 2012 the employer denied to recognised him (My partner done volunteer work with him back in 2008 to 2009), we made contact with the employer and he cannot remember any verification been done against my partner so now he has given us statutory declaration and confirming that my partner worked with him and the reference letter is genuine. I send the employer and also my partner declaration to the immigration.

Based on my situation I don't know what will happen next and what else I can do to satisfy CO, i am really worried. Mark what you suggest in this situation, how long will they take to response??

Thanks and looking for your response.


----------



## MarkNortham (Dec 19, 2012)

Hi Casper -

Thanks for the note PIC4020 is very serious stuff, and can result in a 3-year ban on visa applications or worse. In these cases, we always try to show as much corroborating evidence as possible to prove that the accusations of false info, etc are incorrect. Not sure what your stat dec said, etc so I can't really evaluate your response or whether additional documents would be helpful. No estimate on DIBP processing for these - can be as short as a few weeks, or go into months. Normally we suggest that applicants who are facing a PIC4020 allegation engage a registered migration agent to fight the allegation, given the seriousness of the penalties involved.

Hope this helps -

Best,

Mark Northam


----------



## Casper (Apr 28, 2014)

MarkNortham said:


> Hi Casper -
> 
> Thanks for the note PIC4020 is very serious stuff, and can result in a 3-year ban on visa applications or worse. In these cases, we always try to show as much corroborating evidence as possible to prove that the accusations of false info, etc are incorrect. Not sure what your stat dec said, etc so I can't really evaluate your response or whether additional documents would be helpful. No estimate on DIBP processing for these - can be as short as a few weeks, or go into months. Normally we suggest that applicants who are facing a PIC4020 allegation engage a registered migration agent to fight the allegation, given the seriousness of the penalties involved.
> 
> ...


Hi Mark

Thanks for your early response its really appreciated

We are based in Perth so i am thinking to book a session through Skype probably on coming Monday morning to discuss in details and try to look further ways to avoid any bad out come.

Thanks and kind regards


----------



## MarkNortham (Dec 19, 2012)

Hi Casper -

Sounds good - would be very helpful if you can send me as many of the documents involved (including communications with DIBP) prior to the consulting session so we can review and discuss during the session.

Best,

Mark Northam


----------

