Originally Posted by scubadu

Not sure if this poster is still following this thread, but I appreciate this posting, it's helpful. I too am trying to assist/guide a family member (unfortunately, I'm the "travel expert") on this very topic. What I find frustrating/odd is that, in my research on this topic, Australia's own guidelines very clearly state that a visitor/tourist is eligible to obtain an ETA/Subclass 601 if they "have no criminal convictions for which sentence is 12 months or more." Yet it appears when they ask the question they simply ask something like, "Have you ever been convicted of a crime?" That seems to be an altogether different question than what is codified in the requirements and is somewhat confusing to an applicant. It makes them wonder if perhaps the wording is a mistake and should they answer "no" if they haven't been convicted of a crime which resulted in a sentence of 12 months or more? And if they answer "yes", will the ETA be immediately denied even though by the requirements they are seemingly eligible?

I guess I'm perplexed why they don't simply word the question to match the documented criteria. It seems they could easily word the question, "Have you ever been convicted of a crime which resulted in a sentence of 12 months or greater? It seems that would allow people who meet the documented criteria to answer honestly (and without fear) and would allow the Department of Home Affairs to focus their efforts and time on those applicants that would have to answer "yes" to the question when worded that way.

Anyhow, based on this posters experience, I'm leaning towards recommending the family member go ahead and submit the ETA application and hope that it generates the same outcome as this poster.

Regards