The people concerned still stay in Singapore.pl write very very
carefully.
u have been warned.
@@@@@@@@@@
Dentist pain in Oz PR renew.Son & daughter r OZ citizens
cant help!!
SG dentist,wife and son of 21 years old (yo )(who just finished
SG National Service
in Mar 2009.read below.) were refused to renew their OZ PR
status.Their 13 yo son and 16 yo daugher are Oz citizens.The 13 yo
son has been studying in SG and intended to start Oz education in
early 2009.(read my 2 nd post).
The 16 yo daughter has been studying in SG RI 6 years
programme.
The couple PR were first granted in 1994,but they stayed very
short in Oz.
Every country can do what they like in migration matters.
SG ICA is also famous for some strange decisions.
So,be careful.Ladies and gentlemen.Why a mess if u cant be with
your kids
if they stay in Oz?
Migration ,if goes wrong ,is very painful.Many pple think a move
when the situation in SG looks bad.Think carefully.If u cant make a
living in a place which u are damn familiar,do u think u can be
better in a new place?Also,u are not the
majority race there.See how SG pple treat FT then u know,eg
pple
from PRC.same race but different language also suffer.
Not to mention u have different color.
I suggest u read migration cases decisions here to prepare for
the worst.
http://www.mrt-rrt.gov.au/decisions.asp
MRT decisions
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/MRTA/
the case is here.The name is the same as in today Strait
Times.
0900261 [2009] MRTA 1109 (22 June 2009) [66%]
<!--make_database:
source=/home/philip/austlii/db/MRTA/data/2009_1109.html-->
<!--sino date 22 June 2009-->
Last Updated: 30 June 2009
0900261 [2009]
MRTA 1109 (22 June 2009)
DECISION RECORD
REVIEW APPLICANTS: David Yi Tze
Chan
Dorcas Yi Jia Chan
VISA APPLICANT: Toong Sing Chan
MRT CASE NUMBER: 0900261
DIAC REFERENCE: VR08/151598
I think this is the dentist case,though names deleted.
http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/cth/MRTA/2009/1107.html?query=Singapore
<!--make_database:
source=/home/philip/austlii/db/MRTA/data/2009_1107.html-->
<!--sino date 22 June 2009-->
Last Updated: 13 July 2009
0900240 [2009] MRTA 1107 (22 June 2009)
DECISION RECORD
REVIEW APPLICANTS: Review Applicant
1
Review Applicant 2
VISA APPLICANT: The visa applicant (LION
NOTE---DENTIST'S WIFE)
I,(LION NOTE---DENTIST'S
WIFE) The visa applicant [name deleted:
S378], am the appointed representative to act on behalf of
Review Applicants, [Review Applicant 1], (13 years' old) and [Review Applicant 2]
(16 years' old). [Review
Applicant 1] and [Review Applicant 2] are my dependent children and
they are Australian
citizens.
The visa applicants are my husband
[Mr A], our eldest dependent son [Mr B] (20 years' old) and
I. Our Resident Return Visa subclass 155 expired on 22
Dec08.
...............
As mentioned, our plans are to progressively return to Australia
over the next couple of years because it is practically not
feasible for the entire family to relocate to Sydney immediately.
[Mr B] is presently drafted in the army, serving compulsory
national service to the Government of
Singapore
till Mar09. [Review Applicant 2] is two-third way
through a six-year programme at the
Raffles schools, taking her from Year 7 to Year 12. We have
considered and deliberated but concluded that it will not be in her
best interests if we disrupt her studies to move her to Australia
now. She will graduate from Year 12 in Dec 10 and then look to
pursue university education in Australia. Over the next two years, I will be in
Australia for most part of the time to be there for [Review
Applicant 1] while [Mr A] will spend more time in
Singapore
to take care of [Review Applicant 2].
nnnn
WARNING
The people concerned still stay in Singapore.pl write very very
carefully.
u have been warned.