Training manual · Australia · Bridging

Bridging visa C (BVC) (subclass 030)

People who applied for a substantive visa while unlawful (no substantive visa) - keeps them lawful while it is decided.

BridgingBridgingOnshore

Overview Process flow Eligibility checklist Document checklist Cost checklist Qualification checklist Eligible cases Refusal cases Self-exam

1. Overview

Know these facts cold before the first client conversation - they are also what the exam below tests. Not a substantive visa - it bridges an onshore application made without a current visa.

Visa typeBridging

LodgementOnshore

StayUntil the substantive application is decided

Work rightsOften no work rights unless granted

Study rightsSometimes

Government chargeFree

Processing timeGranted with the substantive application

2. Process flow

The handling sequence for a 030 file, from first consultation to decision. Each step assumes the one before it is genuinely finished - not "mostly done".

Establish how they became unlawful
The BVC arises when a substantive application is made onshore without holding a substantive visa. Understand the history - it shapes everything.
Check work rights
BVCs often carry no work rights; a separate application citing financial hardship can request them.
Brief on travel
No travel facility at all - leaving Australia ends the bridge with no way back on it.

3. Eligibility checklist

Every box must be confirmable with evidence, not the client's say-so, before you advise that the 030 is viable.

Applied for a substantive visa onshore without holding a substantive visaThe application is still being decided

Your ticks save in this browser so you can work through the manual across sessions.

4. Document checklist

The lodgement pack. Aim for decision-ready: a case officer should be able to grant without asking for anything further.

Valid passport biodata page for every applicant - check expiry against expected processing timeCertified identity documents: birth certificate, national ID, any change-of-name evidencePolice certificates for every country the client lived in for 12+ months in the last 10 years (since turning 16)Health examinations with an approved panel physician when requested (record the HAP ID)Form 956 appointing you as the registered agent, signed before you deal with the DepartmentThe substantive application acknowledgementFinancial-hardship evidence if requesting work rights

Your ticks save in this browser so you can work through the manual across sessions.

5. Cost checklist

Quote the full stack, in writing, before the client signs. Surprise costs are the fastest way to lose a client's trust (and earn a complaint).

Item	Indicative amount
Base visa application charge (2025-26, indicative)	Free
Usually no separate charge (BVB excepted)	The BVB charge is ~$190
Your professional fee	Per your agency's schedule - quote in writing before Form 956
Rule of thumb	Government charges usually change every 1 July - re-quote any file that lodges after 30 June

6. Qualification checklist

Run this in the first consultation, before taking a retainer. It screens the client, not the visa: history, hard stops and honesty come first.

Full visa history for every applicant: refusals, cancellations and overstays anywhere in the world - undisclosed history is a PIC 4020 problem that surfaces at the worst timeIf onshore: what visa they hold now, its expiry, any 8503/8534 'no further stay' condition, and any section 48 bar from a refusalHealth: significant medical conditions in the family unit (for permanent visas the health requirement can apply to non-migrating dependants too)Character: criminal history anywhere, ever - a substantial criminal record is a hard stopIdentity: names and dates consistent across every document the client holdsMoney: the client understands the full cost stack and your fee before signing anythingConfirm: Applied for a substantive visa onshore without holding a substantive visaConfirm: The application is still being decided

Your ticks save in this browser so you can work through the manual across sessions.

7. Case studies - eligible cases

Illustrative composites showing what a grantable 030 file looks like in practice.

Grant: Daniel from Egypt

Background: Daniel, a former student-visa holder from Egypt. People who applied for a substantive visa while unlawful (no substantive visa) - keeps them lawful while it is decided.
Why it qualified: (1) Applied for a substantive visa onshore without holding a substantive visa. (2) The application is still being decided.
What made the file strong: The agent tested the weakest criterion first and fixed it before lodging, not after a natural-justice letter.
Outcome: Granted within the indicative processing window (Granted with the substantive application).

Grant: Mei from Brazil

Background: Mei, an onshore partner-visa applicant from Brazil. People who applied for a substantive visa while unlawful (no substantive visa) - keeps them lawful while it is decided.
Why it qualified: (1) Applied for a substantive visa onshore without holding a substantive visa. (2) The application is still being decided.
What made the file strong: Dates, names and figures matched across every document - no internal inconsistencies to trigger checks.
Outcome: Granted within the indicative processing window (Granted with the substantive application).

8. Case studies - refusal cases

The same visa, handled badly. Every one of these failure modes is screenable at the first consultation.

Refusal: Amir from South Africa

Background: Amir, a graduate whose visa expired from South Africa, engaged an agent late and pushed for a fast lodgement of the 030.
What went wrong: No travel facility - leaving Australia ends the bridge
Outcome: The case officer decided on the papers without a further request - the file had to stand on its own, and it could not.
Lesson for the agent: Put this issue on the document checklist on day one and refuse to lodge until it is closed out.

Refusal: Ngoc from Mexico

Background: Ngoc, a skilled-visa applicant from Mexico, engaged an agent late and pushed for a fast lodgement of the 030.
What went wrong: Often limited or no work rights
Outcome: The refusal went to review: another year, more cost, and no certainty the outcome changes.
Lesson for the agent: Apply the decision-ready test: if you cannot evidence the claim today, the application is not ready to lodge.

9. Self-exam

9 questions drawn from this manual. Pass mark 80%. Answers are graded on the server and your result is recorded against your agent profile - retakes are unlimited and your best score is kept. Log in to the agent portal first so your result is saved to My trainings.

Back to all manuals