Login / Join
Incorrect EOI points
Email from Migration Alliance to the Department of Immigration and Border Protection:
Dear Jacqui
Could you urgently please get back to me about this because quite a few of my members have come to me with this problem. I can let everyone know the answer via a news blast.
Thank you kindly.
Best regards,
Liana J Allan
Treasurer
Registered Migration Agent 0104178
http://migrationalliance.com.au/
___________________________________________________________________________________
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Date: Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 4:20 PM
Subject: Help - Incorrect EOI Points
To: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Dear Liana,
I am hoping you might be able to assist me with a query that the DIBP itself have not been able to (no surprises!).
I refer to the MIA Notice below dated 17 September 2013 and one of my clients has been affected by an incorrect score under the Subclass 189 visa. The difference between the MIA notice is that I had not “inadvertently” claimed more points for my client, but rather, the system had awarded the points.
The SkillSelect system gave my Client 15 points for education, when he should have received 10 points for education (based on an overseas Bachelor and Australian Masters). My client then received an invitation on 18 November 2013 with an indicative score of 65 points, when his score should only be 60. I am therefore unsure whether I should lodge his application, as the officers I spoke to at the GSM centre weren’t even aware of this issue and had the gall to accusing me of tampering with the points! I even lodged a second EOI for my client just to double check and the system awarded the same number of incorrect points.
The only way to get the correct score is to not declare my client’s Master’s qualification, which would then be seen as a failure to provide true and accurate information!
Based on the latest reports for the Round 4 November 2013 Results, the report indicates that my client’s nominated occupation of Systems Engineer (261313), which falls under the category of “2613 Software and Applications Programmers” require a score of 60 points, which is my client’s correct score:
http://www.immi.gov.au/skills/skillselect/index/reports/report-2013-11-4/
My client has instructed me to lodge the application as soon as possible, but I would rather err on the side of caution.
Thank you for you kind attention in this matter and I would be so grateful if you could let me know your thoughts!
Kind Regards,
XXXXXXXXXXXXX - Registered Migration Agent
MARN XXXXXX
________________________________________________________________________________
MIA Notice: Important clarification of SkillSelect invitation point scores;
Author: Migration Institute of Australia
17 September 2013 —
Important clarification of SkillSelect invitation point scores
The MIA has raised Members’ concerns about points discrepancies between the SkillSelect invitation score and the point test assessed score upon application by a client. Following the MIA’s representations, the Department, after extensive consultation with its policy area, has issued its official position:
A criterion for the grant of a Subclass 189 visa, a Subclass 190 visa and the First Provisional Visa stream for a Skilled – Regional Sponsored (Provisional) (Class SP) visa (“a SkillSelect visa”) is that the applicant’s score, when assessed in relation to the visa under Subdivision B of Division 3 of Part 2 of the Act [the points test assessed score], is not less than the score stated in the invitation to apply for the visa [the invitation score].
The criterion acts as a disincentive to deliberate inflation of claims in the expression of interest (EOI) in order to obtain a higher ranking position in SkillSelect and ultimately an invitation to apply for a Skillselect visa.
However, the Department has become aware of cases where clients have made inadvertent errors when entering data in SkillSelect resulting in them being given a higher invitation score than they should otherwise have.
To reduce the likelihood of such errors occurring, the Department has significantly improved the information in SkillSelect. Nevertheless, some applicants may still make inadvertent errors in their EOIs.
To address this issue, consideration will be given to correcting an applicant’s invitation score where the Department identifies that an applicant has made an inadvertent error in their EOI and their corrected invitation score would have been high enough such that it would have resulted in an invitation being made in the original or subsequent SkillSelect invitation rounds.
For example, if an affected applicant’s invitation score was 75, and the lowest invitation scores for the relevant period were 75, 70 and 65 respectively, the applicant’s corrected invitation score must be no less than 65 before the Department would seek to correct the invitation score.
Departmental officers will first seek the permission of the affected applicant before correcting their invitation score.
PLEASE NOTE:
IT applicants will continue to be affected (or all of the 16 near capacity occupation) as the invite pass mark is so much higher due to the rationing.
Subclass 190 or 489 invitations under SMPs would be straightforward approvals as there is no advantage gained as the base line of 60 pt generates the invite as soon as the state approval is finalised within SkillsSelect.
Any Members with complex matters (ie Subclass 189 visas ) who would like some advice on their particular cases before they approach a case officer should email the MIA with the subject heading “GMS Points Test”.
___________________________________________________________________________________
Response from DIBP to Migration Alliance 2:19pm on 16/12/2013:
...
