# The Judy D'Souza WhatsApp thread — the half the mailboxes never saw

Pasted into session by Rocky, 2026-08-05. **This is the record of what actually happened on
the skills assessment**, and none of it was reachable by the rail — WhatsApp is not a
mailbox and the rail reads INBOX only.

Judy D'Souza · `judydsouza@cdraustraliaservice.com` · CDR Australia Service.

**Judy is a document preparation service, not a registered migration agent.** Sibeal Ní
Mháille (MARN 0963760) is the MARA agent. Migration advice comes from Sibeal. Judy prepares
and lodges documents.

---

## What happened, in order

### June 2026 — the video evidence stage

TRA/VETASSESS require **video evidence** of him performing the trade. The video guide sets
out **three options**; he picks one and must cover every required element of it.

**First video REJECTED.** Judy, verbatim:

> *"Nothing matches at the moment. A Carpenter mainly works with timber-based buildings,
> structures, and related timber work. In the first video, the work shown is concrete kerb
> repair, which does not align with your occupation scope, so unfortunately this cannot be
> used."*

**Second video REJECTED.** *"prepared for Option 1, but it does not demonstrate all the
required elements outlined in the video guide."*

Also required: **landscape mode**. Said twice.

**Huss at LFCS pushed back**, arguing formwork is carpentry — false work / temporary work —
and listing the CPC30211 Cert III units he says the videos already covered:

- CPCCCM1013A Plan and organise work
- CPCCCM1015A Carry out measurements and calculations
- CPCCCA2011A Handle carpentry materials
- CPCCCA2002B Use carpentry tools and equipment
- CPCCCA3023A Carry out levelling operations
- CPCCCA3002A Carry out setting out
- CPCCCO2013A Carry out concreting to simple forms

Rocky's own argument: setting out a kerb is the same skill as setting out a building — square,
parallel, follow the survey marks — and formwork for a kerb is harder than a slab on ground.

**Judy held the line**, verbatim: *"Yes, I understand your point, Michael. However, we need to
strictly follow the guidelines based on the ANZSCO code provided by the assessing body."*

He reshot on site. Judy: *"The videos look good. I'm currently adding subtitles and trimming
one of the videos which is around 9 minutes long. Once that's done, we'll go ahead and lodge
the application."*

### The portal logins — mystery solved

Judy logs into the VETASSESS portal **as him**, and asks him for the one-time codes as they
arrive. Codes passed in the thread: `175415`, `479470`, `391628`.

**This explains the "Login Attempt Verification Required - SRT Applicant" emails** in the
corpus on 22/06 (x3), 03/07 (x3), 05/07, 08/07 and 09/07. They are not intrusions. They are
Judy working the file. The rail classified them ACT, which was right — they just meant
something different to what was assumed.

### A form that had to be printed by hand

Judy sent a form as an **image, not a PDF**. He asked for a PDF so he could sign it
digitally. Judy: *"It is in image format, not PDF. You will need to print it out and fill it
in manually."*

### Lodgement and payment

Judy uploaded everything to the portal and asked him to review. He replied *"It looks good
if your happy im happy."* She said to proceed with payment and lodge.

Payment would not go through at first. Judy: *"It'll take sometime Michael as they're
verifying the documents right now."* Then *"they will let you pay once the documents are
verified."* Paid **09/07**, $1120.

### The OSAP question — HE RAISED IT AND GOT A HAND-WAVE

> **Rocky:** *"hey Judy its the offshore skills assessment im looking for?"*
> **Rocky:** *"It said offshore trade assessment. Is that correct? Im living in Australia"*
> **Judy:** *"The mentioned OSAP in the portal is just the name of the specific
> payment/registration portal you need to use Michael."*

**OSAP is the Offshore Skills Assessment Program. He is onshore, in Australia, on a 482.**
He spotted the mismatch himself and was told it is only a portal name.

**UNVERIFIED and NOT checked against TRA.** It may well be correct — OSAP is used for some
employer-sponsored pathways regardless of where the applicant is sitting. But it was
answered by a document service, not by a registered migration agent, and it goes to whether
the entire assessment is on the right pathway.

**This is a question for Sibeal, and it is the highest-value question on the file.** If the
pathway is wrong, nothing else matters. Cheap to ask, catastrophic to get wrong at 49 days.

### Where it stopped

> **Rocky:** *"Looking for an update here. What is next and when are we expecting to hear
> back from the TRA? I am running out of time here"*
> **Judy:** *"we're waiting to hear back from TRA on the documents submitted. Processing
> times can vary depending upon the assessor. You'll must probably hear from them within a
> month."*

Then, later:

> **Judy:** *"Have you received any updates from TRA yet?"*
> **Rocky:** *"Still nothing there from TRA"*
> **Judy:** *"Just let me know once you receive an update from TRA."*

---

## THE THREE THINGS THAT MATTER

**1. NOBODY IS CHASING TRA.** Judy is waiting on Rocky to forward a TRA email. Rocky is
waiting on Judy for an update. TRA is waiting for nothing because nobody has contacted them.
This is a mutual stall and it has been running since 09/07. **Someone has to ring TRA.**

**2. "Within a month" from 09/07 lands about now** — 09/08/2026. So the polite wait is over
in days, and chasing is now reasonable rather than pushy.

**3. The occupation-scope problem is real and it did not go away.** Carpenter under ANZSCO
is timber. His actual work is civils formwork and concrete. Two videos were rejected on
exactly that ground before one was accepted. The same tension sits inside his reference
letters and employment evidence, which come from a civils contractor. If an assessor takes
the same view Judy took of the kerb video, that is where it bites.

---

## What this changes about the "practical assessment"

Sibeal's 04/08 email named a **Technical interview and practical assessment** as remaining
stages. The videos were evidence lodged with the documentary stage, not the practical.

**UNVERIFIED whether a separate technical interview or practical still has to be booked.**
Judy has never mentioned one. Sibeal named both and pushed them to Judy. Nobody has given a
date. That gap is the schedule risk and it is still open.

---

# UPDATE — the 17/07, 29/07 and 05/08 messages · pasted by Rocky 2026-08-06

Verbatim, and they settle several things this file previously marked UNVERIFIED.

## The estimate was given 17/07, not 09/07 — SUPERSEDES the date above

**17/07 16:38, Judy:** *"Thanks for checking in, I completely understand the time pressure.
Currently, we're waiting to hear back from TRA on the documents submitted. Processing times can
vary depending upon the assessor. **You'll must probably hear from them within a month.**"*

So "within a month" runs from **17 July**, landing about **17 August 2026** — not 09/08 as this
file and `CONTEXT.md` both said. **Nine days later than recorded.** The polite wait is not over
yet, which weakens the "chase now because the estimate has expired" argument. It does not weaken
anything else below.

## Judy was asked directly to chase TRA, and declined

**05/08 12:19, Rocky:** *"its been a month since the 1120 went through and TRA have said nothing.
**Can you ring them for an update, or give me the number and I will.** Waiting on an email that
never comes is not working."*

**05/08 12:26, Judy:** *"I know it's frustrating, but TRA assessments do take time and
**unfortunately there's no way to speed the process up from our end.** You're welcome to call them
directly and ask for a status update on your application. I've attached an overview of the
assessment process for your reference."*

**That is a decline, in writing.** Read with 17/07 *"Please do let me know once you hear from
them"* and 29/07 *"Have you received any updates from TRA yet?"* and *"Just let me know once you
receive an update"* — **Judy has asked Rocky for news three times and has never once contacted TRA
herself.** The mutual stall recorded earlier is not mutual. It is one-directional.

**Judy is a document service, not a case manager.** She prepared and lodged the paperwork. She is
not chasing, not booking, and has now said plainly that she cannot speed anything up. **Any
chasing from here is Rocky's to do.** Stop waiting for her to move it.

## She did not answer the practical question — the third party in a row not to

**05/08 12:19, Rocky asked:** *"Also is there a technical interview or practical still to be
booked, or was the video the lot?"*

**She did not answer it.** The reply addresses timing, offers a phone number, and points at an
attachment. The question went unanswered.

That is now **three** parties who have not answered it: Sibeal pushed it to Judy, Judy pushed it to
an attachment, and TRA has not been asked. **The single fact that determines whether 23/09 is
achievable has been asked for and dodged twice.**

## THE ATTACHMENT MAY HOLD THE ANSWER — and nobody has opened it

**05/08 12:26: *"I've attached an overview of the assessment process for your reference."***

An overview of the assessment process is exactly the document that would list whether a technical
interview or practical assessment is a required stage. **It is sitting in WhatsApp, unread, and it
may answer in thirty seconds the question three people have failed to answer in a fortnight.**
**Open it first, before making any call.**

## The number Judy gave for "TRA" is VETASSESS's number

**05/08 12:28, Judy:** *"+61 3 9655 4801 this is the number."* — offered as TRA's.

**It is not TRA. `+61 3 9655 4801` is VETASSESS**, the number `CONTEXT.md` already records against
**Julie, Service Officer, VETASSESS Customer Service Centre**, and the number Rocky had **already
phoned the previous day, 04/08**, which is how the urgent processing form came about.

Not necessarily a bad number to ring — **VETASSESS is the RTO delivering the OSAP assessment**, so
they are the people who would actually conduct and schedule a technical interview or practical.
But it is not TRA, and Judy either did not know that or did not check.

**The practical implication is the useful one: stop chasing TRA about the practical. TRA holds the
money and the registration; VETASSESS delivers the assessment.** The booking question belongs to
VETASSESS, and Rocky already has a named contact there.