VISA REFUSAL LETTERS

What Visa Refusal Letter Wording Means

A plain-English guide for Indian applicants to the wording, codes and rule references that appear on visitor visa refusals for the USA, Canada, the UK, the Schengen area, Australia and New Zealand. Each table gives the official wording or reference, our plain-English explanation of it, and the official route that follows, with links to the official sources. Have a refusal letter in hand? Get your visitor / tourist visa refusal letter reviewed.

START HERE

Reading Your Refusal Letter

How to use this guide

A refusal letter is a decision about one application, on the evidence that was in front of the decision maker. It is not a judgement about you as a person, and it is not a promise about what a new application will do.

Start from a sentence in your letter using the index below, or find the legal reference, code or criterion in your own letter and look it up in the table for your destination. Each table has five columns: the official wording or reference, then IndoWorld’s plain-English explanation of what it means, the kind of evidence it relates to and what it does not mean, and finally the official route that follows. Only the first column is official wording; the explanation columns are ours and are not official wording. Your own letter is always the document that counts, and the words around the legal reference are often a template.

This guide is general information, not legal advice, and no wording or step in it makes an approval more or less certain. It covers visitor visas only.

At a glance: where the wording appears and what routes exist

Destination	Where the wording appears	Appeal or review, as the official sources describe it
USA (B1/B2)	A written refusal that names the section of the Immigration and Nationality Act used, such as 214(b) or 221(g).	No appeal. The standard letters say you may reapply, and that a new application should include information not presented before.
Canada	The refusal letter in your IRCC account (or by post for paper applications), and for many application types an officer decision note.	No formal appeal for a visitor visa. Options are a new application where something has changed, an informal reconsideration request, or leave and judicial review at the Federal Court.
UK (Standard Visitor)	A refusal notice citing paragraphs of Appendix V: Visitor (for example V 4.2) and sometimes Part Suitability (SUI).	No administrative review for a Standard Visitor refusal, and a right of appeal only where the application included a human rights claim. The closing paragraph of your notice states what applies to you.
Schengen	The standard refusal form (Annex VI of the Visa Code): tick-boxes with numbered reasons.	A right of appeal under the national law of the country that took the decision. The time limit is printed on your form.
Australia (subclass 600)	A refusal notice that must name the criterion not met. Home Affairs says it tells you why and whether you have a right of review.	Home Affairs says the notice tells you whether you have a right of review. An applicant who applied from outside Australia generally has no right of ART review under section 338(2), which requires an application made in Australia.
New Zealand	A decline letter giving written reasons, using terms from the Operational Manual.	For an application made from outside New Zealand, the official route is a new application. Formal reconsideration is for certain onshore applicants.

UNITED STATES

USA B1/B2 Visitor Visa Refusal Wording

Where this wording appears

After a visa interview, a US consular officer who cannot issue the visa tells the applicant orally and gives a written refusal letter. US State Department rules say the written refusal must name the legal provision used, and for the main grounds the letter uses approved or required wording (9 FAM 403.10-3). The provisions you will see are sections of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), for example INA 214(b), INA 221(g) or INA 212(a)(6)(C)(i). Sections 214(b) and 221(g) are two of the provisions you may see on a B1/B2 refusal. The 212(a) grounds are inadmissibility grounds: the officer must say which one applies and whether a waiver is available (22 CFR 41.121(b)(1)). A 221(g) result is also a legal refusal, even though it can be a request for more documents or for more checking.

Sentences from a US refusal letter

The first column quotes the sentence from the cited source: an official template, the legal text, an official page, or a published court or tribunal decision that reproduces a notice or officer note. The other columns are IndoWorld’s own plain-English explanation, not official wording. Your own letter may be worded differently, so read it first.

The sentence as it appears	Plain-English meaning	What it usually points to	What it does not mean	Official route afterwards
“This is to inform you that you have been found ineligible for a nonimmigrant visa under Section 214(b) of the U.S. Immigration and Nationality Act. A denial under Section 214(b) means that you were not able to demonstrate that your intended activities in the United States would be consistent with the classification of the nonimmigrant visa for which you applied.” Source: 9 FAM 403.10-3(A)(3)(a), the State Department’s approved letter for 214(b) refusals where ties were not shown	The officer was not satisfied that your planned activities fit the visa category you applied for. Section 214(b) starts from the assumption that a visitor may be an intending immigrant, and the applicant shows otherwise at the interview.	The purpose and plans you described at the interview, who pays, and your job, home and family at home (9 FAM 402.2-2).	It is not a finding that you lied. The Manual says 214(b) is not a permanent ineligibility and that a later applicant can qualify by showing a change in circumstances (9 FAM 403.10-2(B)(1)).	No appeal. A new application is the route (see the reapply row below).
“Applicants usually meet this requirement by demonstrating that they have strong ties overseas that indicate that they will return to a foreign country after a temporary visit to the United States. Such ties include professional, work, school, family, or social links to a foreign country. You have not demonstrated that you have the ties that will compel you to return to your home country after your travel to the United States.” Source: 9 FAM 403.10-3(A)(3)(a), the same approved letter	The officer was not satisfied that you have a residence abroad that you do not intend to abandon. The letter text names the kinds of link that can show it: professional, work, school, family or social.	Your job or business, family and responsibilities at home, studies, home and other links, and how you described them at the interview.	It does not say which link fell short, and it is not a finding that you plan to stay in the US. The Manual says the refusal has to rest on your own circumstances: fitting a profile such as young or single is not a ground (9 FAM 403.10-3(A)(1)(d)).	As above.
“A denial under Section 214(b) means that you did not meet the requirements of the classification of the nonimmigrant visa for which you applied.” Source: 9 FAM 403.10-3(A)(3)(b), the approved letter for 214(b) refusals for reasons other than ties	The officer was not satisfied about a requirement of the visa category other than home ties, for example the purpose of the trip or the plans for the visit.	Trip purpose, specific plans for the visit and length of stay (9 FAM 402.2-2).	It is not a statement about your ties, and it does not say which requirement was not met.	As above.
“Today’s decision cannot be appealed. However, you may reapply at any time. If you decide to reapply, you must submit a new application form and photo, pay the visa application fee again, and make a new appointment to be interviewed by a consular officer. If you choose to reapply, you should be prepared to provide information that was not presented in your original application, or to demonstrate that your circumstances have changed since that application.” Source: 9 FAM 403.10-3(A)(3)(a), approved letter (the second letter, 403.10-3(A)(3)(b), carries the same appeal and reapply paragraph)	There is no appeal. You may apply again at any time with a new form, fee and interview, and the letter says to bring information that was not presented before, or to show that your circumstances changed.	What has changed since the refusal, and what was not in the first application.	It is not a waiting period and not a ban. The Manual also says officers must neither encourage nor discourage reapplying (9 FAM 403.10-3(A)(1)(e)).	A new application. The Manual says there is no waiver for 214(b) (9 FAM 403.10-3(A)(5)).
“Every alien … shall be presumed to be an immigrant until he establishes to the satisfaction of the consular officer, at the time of application for a visa, and the immigration officers, at the time of application for admission, that he is entitled to a nonimmigrant status under section 1101(a)(15) of this title.” Source: INA 214(b), 8 U.S.C. 1184(b) (the ellipsis leaves out the listed exceptions)	The law starts from the assumption that a visa applicant may be planning to settle in the US. The applicant shows otherwise, to the officer’s satisfaction, at the interview.	Your answers and papers on purpose, plans and ties.	It is the legal starting point that applies to every applicant, not a comment on you.	As above.
“Fitting a certain demographic profile (“young”, “single”, etc.) is not grounds for a visa refusal. In an INA 214(b) refusal, the denial must always be based on a finding that the applicant’s specific circumstances failed to overcome the intending immigrant presumption.” Source: 9 FAM 403.10-3(A)(1)(d), State Department instruction to consular officers (not a sentence from a letter)	If you wonder whether you were refused because of your age or marital status: the State Department tells officers that this is not a ground, and that the finding must rest on your own circumstances.	Your specific circumstances: purpose, plans, and your links to home.	It does not say that an applicant with a given profile will or will not be approved, and it does not promise any outcome.	As above.
“Please be advised that for U.S. visa purposes, including ESTA (see ESTA website), this decision constitutes a denial of a visa.” Source: 9 FAM 403.10-3(A)(2)(d), language a 221(g) letter must include	A 221(g) result is recorded as a refusal, and the letter says so, including for ESTA. The Manual says the letter may refer to further administrative processing but may not describe the denial as pending, temporary or interim.	Whatever the officer asked for in the written instruction: documents, information, or further processing.	It is not a final refusal and not a permanent ineligibility: an applicant refused under 221(g) can wait for the results of administrative processing or comply with a request for documents or information within one year of the visa interview (9 FAM 403.10-3(A)(5)).	Follow the written instruction. If less than one year has passed since the latest refusal, no new application form or MRV fee is needed to reactivate the case (9 FAM 403.10-4(A)). No waiver is available for 221(g) (9 FAM 403.10-4(C)).
“This office regrets to inform you that your visa application is refused because you have been found ineligible to receive a visa under the following section(s) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. … You are eligible to seek a waiver of the grounds of ineligibility. / No waiver is available for the grounds of ineligibility.” Source: 9 FAM 403.10-3(A)(3)(c), the optional 212(a) refusal letter (a 212(a) letter must say whether a waiver is available, 403.10-3(A)(2))	The refusal is under a 212(a) inadmissibility ground, not 214(b). The waiver section of the letter says whether a waiver is available.	Whichever 212(a) paragraph is marked on the letter, for example public charge, criminal grounds, health-related grounds, or a ground written in under “Other”.	It is not a 214(b) ties refusal. A waiver being available does not mean one will be recommended or granted.	For nonimmigrants the waiver route is INA 212(d)(3)(A), which needs an initial recommendation from the officer or the Department (9 FAM 403.10-4(C)).

In the table below, the first column gives the official wording or reference. The plain-English meaning, evidence and what-it-does-not-mean columns are IndoWorld’s own explanation of the official sources, not official wording. Your own letter’s wording may differ, so read it first.

Wording or reference	Plain-English meaning	Evidence it relates to	What it does not mean	Official route afterwards
INA 214(b). The applicant has not shown that they qualify for the visa category.	US law starts from the assumption that a person asking for a visitor visa may be planning to settle in the US. You have to convince the officer, at the interview, that you qualify as a genuine temporary visitor (INA 214(b); the burden is on the applicant under INA 291, per 9 FAM 302.1-2). The State Department says 214(b) “does not provide any independent standards for qualifying for an NIV”: the officer applies the requirements of the visa category, so failing any one of them can lead to 214(b).	For B1/B2 the Foreign Affairs Manual tells officers to assess whether the applicant has a residence abroad they do not intend to abandon, intends a stay of specifically limited duration, and seeks entry for the sole purpose of legitimate business or pleasure activities, with specific and realistic plans for the whole visit (9 FAM 402.2-2(B) and (D)). Answers and documents about the trip plan, who pays, and your job, home and family at home relate to those factors.	It is not a finding that you lied, and it is not a permanent bar (9 FAM 302.1-2(B)(3)). It is not only about home ties; it covers any category requirement the officer was not satisfied about (9 FAM 302.1-2(B)(6)). The explanation is meant to rest on your own circumstances, not on traits such as age or marital status (9 FAM 403.10-3).	No appeal. The standard letters say the decision cannot be appealed, that you may reapply at any time, and that a new application should include information not presented before (9 FAM 403.10-3(A)(3)). A new application is judged on the facts at that time, so changed circumstances matter (9 FAM 306.2-2(B)(1)). There is no waiver for a 214(b) refusal; it can be overcome by a later application (9 FAM 302.1-2(D)(2)). The Manual says a 214(b) refusal should generally not be overcome in the same application; an exception is where a supervisor determines the refusal was clearly made in error, for example because the wrong standard was applied or after a re-interview (9 FAM 306.2-2(A)). Officers must neither encourage nor discourage reapplying.
INA 221(g): missing documents or information. The letter must state 221(g).	The officer cannot issue the visa yet because the application does not meet the legal requirements. Examples in the Manual: required information or documents not provided, fingerprints refused, a fee not paid, or a wrong statement that is not serious enough for 212(a)(6)(C) (9 FAM 302.1-8(B)).	Whatever the officer asked for in the written instruction, usually specific documents or information.	The State Department treats it legally as a refusal even if it is later overcome (9 FAM 302.1-8(B)). It is not a final no and not a permanent ineligibility. The letter may not describe it as pending or temporary (9 FAM 403.10-3(A)(2)).	Send what was requested, following the instructions on the letter. If the refusal is less than one year old, the case can be reopened without a new application; after one year a fresh application is needed unless the delay was caused by US Government action (9 FAM 403.10-4; 9 FAM 306.2-2(A)). No waiver is needed or available (9 FAM 302.1-8(D)).
INA 221(g): administrative processing	The officer needs further checking before deciding. The refusal under 221(g) is recorded while that happens (9 FAM 306.2-2(A)).	Not controlled by the applicant. It may depend on checks the officer cannot finish at the interview window.	It is not a final decision: the officer can overcome the 221(g) refusal once processing is completed (9 FAM 306.2-2(A)).	Wait for the processing to finish, or answer any request for documents. If less than one year has passed since the latest refusal, the case can be reopened without a new application (9 FAM 403.10-4(A)). When processing is done and any required opinion is received, the officer can overcome the 221(g) refusal and decide (9 FAM 306.2-2(A)).
INA 212(a)(6)(C)(i): fraud or willful misrepresentation	A person is inadmissible if they got, or tried to get, a visa or other benefit by fraud or by willfully misrepresenting a material fact (INA 212(a)(6)(C)(i), 8 U.S.C. 1182).	Statements and documents given to US officials about your own application: forms, interview answers and supporting papers.	All four elements must be present: a false statement, made willfully, that is material, in order to get a benefit (9 FAM 302.9-4(B)). Silence alone is not enough, and honest mistakes or genuine belief are not willful. A statement is material if the truth would have made the person ineligible or if it shut off a relevant line of inquiry.	The Manual calls this a permanent ineligibility, unlike 214(b) (9 FAM 302.1-2(B)(3)). The officer should warn about a possible misrepresentation and let the applicant respond at the interview. A very early correction can remove the problem, but generally only before the same proceeding ends. For visitor visas the officer may recommend a waiver under INA 212(d)(3)(A) (9 FAM 302.9-4(D)(2); 9 FAM 305.4-3). The waiver is discretionary and the outcome is not guaranteed.
INA 212(a)(6)(C)(ii): false claim to US citizenship	Anyone who falsely claims to be a US citizen to get a benefit under US federal or state law is inadmissible (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(6)(C)(ii)).	Statements or documents claiming US citizenship.	It is separate from ordinary misrepresentation in (C)(i) and applies only to claims of citizenship. The statute has an exception where each natural parent is or was a US citizen, the person permanently resided in the US before age 16, and reasonably believed at the time that they were a citizen.	For 212(a) refusals the letter must say whether a waiver is available (9 FAM 403.10-3(A)(2)). Check your letter.
INA 212(a)(9)(B): unlawful presence	A person who stayed in the US without authorization and then left becomes inadmissible for a set period. More than 180 days but under one year of unlawful presence, leaving before removal proceedings began: 3 years. One year or more: 10 years. The period runs from the date the person left (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(9)(B)(i); 9 FAM 302.11-3(B)(2)).	Immigration history: dates of entry, the I-94 end date and the date of departure. For a visitor, time after the I-94 end date counts (9 FAM 302.11-3(B)(1)).	It does not apply to a short overstay of 180 days or less. It is not triggered by a 214(b) refusal. Time does not add up across separate trips. Some periods are paused or excluded, for example while a timely, non-frivolous extension or change-of-status application is pending (the statute caps this pause at 120 days), or for minors (INA 212(a)(9)(B)(iii)-(iv)).	For a nonimmigrant visa the officer may recommend an INA 212(d)(3)(A) waiver (9 FAM 302.11-3(D)(2); 9 FAM 305.4-3). An INA 212(d)(3)(A) waiver can be recommended only if the applicant is not ineligible under INA 214(b) and is otherwise qualified for the visa (9 FAM 305.4-3(B)). The outcome is not guaranteed.
INA 222(g): visa void after overstay	If a person stays past their authorized period in the US, the visa they used to enter becomes void. Generally they must apply for a new visa at a US consulate in their country of nationality (8 U.S.C. 1202(g); 9 FAM 302.1-9).	Past stay length compared with the I-94 end date.	It does not cancel any other valid visa the person holds (9 FAM 302.1-9(B)(2)). It is not the same as the 3-year or 10-year bar.	Apply in the home country (for Indian citizens, an Indian post). The State Department may allow another country only for extraordinary circumstances (9 FAM 302.1-9(B)(2)).
INA 212(a)(4): public charge	The officer believes the person is likely to become primarily dependent on the US Government for support. Factors: age, health, family status, assets and financial status, education and skills (INA 212(a)(4)(B); 9 FAM 302.8-2(B)).	Proof that you can pay for the trip and have enough resources; the officer may ask for specific financial evidence (9 FAM 302.8-2(B)(4)).	For visitors it does not mean you had to show a certain bank balance. The Manual says an extensive inquiry into public charge for a nonimmigrant visa applicant should be rare (9 FAM 302.8-2(B)(4)), and that a documentary gap should result in a 221(g) refusal rather than a public charge finding (9 FAM 302.8-2(B)(5)).	It can be overcome by evidence that the problem no longer applies (9 FAM 302.8-2(D)(2)). A waiver exists in law, but the Manual says it is generally not recommended.
INA 212(a)(2)(A)(i) (criminal grounds), 212(a)(1)(A) (health grounds) and other 212(a) grounds	Criminal: a conviction for, or admission of, a crime involving moral turpitude or a controlled-substance offence (statute). Health: for example a communicable disease of public health significance (statute). These are specific, individual findings.	Court records and medical records, as relevant.	They are specific findings about the individual, not a general-purpose label.	For 212(a) refusals the letter must say whether a waiver is available (9 FAM 403.10-3(A)(2)). The nonimmigrant waiver route is INA 212(d)(3)(A), as above.
INA 212(a)(7)(B): passport and visa documentation	A nonimmigrant needs a passport valid at least six months beyond the period of stay, and a valid visa when applying for entry (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(7)(B)).	Passport validity.	It is mostly applied at the point of entry by border officers rather than as a visa-interview refusal (9 FAM 302.1-4).	Fix the document problem. Waivers are rare (9 FAM 302.1-4).

Reading tips for a US letter

The legal reference in the letter is the part that counts. The words around it are templates.
If the letter cites 214(b), the State Department says reapplying is allowed at any time, with new information. There is no formal appeal process.
If it cites 221(g), read the written instruction on the letter or slip and follow it.
If it cites 212(a), the letter should say whether a waiver is available. Keep a copy of the letter.

Sources for this section (official pages)

CANADA

Canada Visitor Visa Refusal Wording

Where this wording appears

For an online application, the decision and the explanation appear in your IRCC account; for a paper application the explanation is sent with the original documents, including the passport. IRCC says the refusal letter gives the general reason for the decision, and for many application types IRCC now also sends the officer decision note with it, which is the officer’s own written explanation for why the application was refused. This covers visitor visas, super visas and transit visas, but not eTAs. Parts of the note may be removed to protect private or sensitive information.

The legal basis of most visitor refusals is paragraph 179(b) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations (the officer is not satisfied the person will leave Canada at the end of the authorized stay), or an inadmissibility finding under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, for example misrepresentation under section 40. The factors in the table below (purpose of visit, travel history, family ties, employment, financial status) are the factors IRCC describes officers as weighing; your letter may label them differently.

Sentences from a Canadian refusal letter and officer notes

The sentence as it appears	Plain-English meaning	What it usually points to	What it does not mean	Official route afterwards
“Weighing the factors in this application, I am not satisfied that the applicant will depart Canada at the end of the period authorized for their stay. For the reasons above, I have refused this application.” Source: Officer notes reproduced in Barikder v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), Federal Court; a similar conclusion appears in Bawa v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), Federal Court	The officer’s overall conclusion after listing the factors. It is the paragraph 179(b) ground: a visitor visa is issued only if the officer is satisfied the person will leave Canada by the end of the authorized stay (Regulations s.179(b)).	The factors listed earlier in the notes: purpose of the visit, funds, and family ties, as in the rows below.	It is not a finding of misrepresentation, and it does not say one factor alone decided the case.	No formal appeal for a visitor visa. See the Canada table and Review options below.
“The applicant’s assets and financial situation are insufficient to support the stated purpose of travel for themselves (and any accompanying family member(s), if applicable).” Source: Officer notes reproduced in Bawa v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), Federal Court (also in Barikder v. Canada, Federal Court)	The officer compared the funds shown with this trip, its purpose and who is travelling. The comparison is with the trip, not with a fixed balance.	Trip budget, income and savings, who pays, and where the money came from.	It does not state an amount you were short by.	No formal appeal. IRCC says to reapply only if something has changed or you have new documents that address the reasons (IRCC Help Centre). Judicial review is a separate court route with a short deadline (below).
“The purpose of the applicant’s visit to Canada is not consistent with a temporary stay given the details provided in the application.” Source: Officer notes reproduced in Bawa v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), Federal Court (also in Barikder v. Canada, Federal Court)	The reason, itinerary or length of stay as described in the application did not read to the officer as a temporary visit.	Itinerary, invitation, relationship to the host, dates and length of stay.	It is not a finding that the purpose is false or improper. A changed purpose is one of the changes IRCC says can support a new application.	As above.
“The applicant has not submitted enough supporting documents to satisfy me that the applicant has access to sufficient funds for this visit.” Source: Officer notes reproduced in Bawa v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), Federal Court	The money evidence in the file was not enough, in the officer’s view, to show that funds are available for this visit. This is a statement about the documents provided.	Bank statements, income proof, and proof of the host’s funds if the host is paying.	It does not say the money is not real, and it does not list which document was missing.	As above.
“I am not satisfied with the proof of funds demonstrated by the PA. Although financial documentation has been provided showing available funds (statement shows recently deposited lump sums), there is insufficient evidence regarding the origin of these funds.” Source: Officer notes reproduced in Barikder v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), Federal Court (PA is the principal applicant)	Funds were shown, but the officer did not see where they came from. A recent large deposit with no explained source is the situation these notes describe.	Statements showing where each large deposit came from, income records, and who paid.	It is not a finding that the money was faked.	As above.
“The applicant does not have significant family ties outside Canada.” Source: Officer notes reproduced in Barikder v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), Federal Court	The officer did not treat the family you have at home as strong enough, on the file, to show you would return.	Who lives where, dependants, and responsibilities at home.	It does not say you have no family, and it does not say what evidence would change the view.	As above.
“The applicant has significant family ties in Canada.” Source: Officer notes reproduced in Barikder v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), Federal Court	The officer weighed relatives in Canada against the ties at home, as one of the factors.	The relationship and status of relatives in Canada, and the ties at home.	IRCC lists family in Canada as a factor, not as a bar.	As above.

Wording or reference	Plain-English meaning	Evidence it relates to	What it does not mean	Official route afterwards
Not satisfied you will leave Canada at the end of your stay: Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations s.179(b), read with the Act s.20(1)(b) and s.22(2)	The officer must issue a visa only if the person will leave Canada before the authorized stay ends (Regulations 179(b)). A visitor must show they are ready to leave when the stay ends (Act 20(1)(b)). IRCC calls this the most common refusal reason, and officers weigh it on a balance of probabilities (IRCC Report to Parliament).	IRCC says officers look at things such as employment, family ties at home and in Canada, financial means and the purpose of travel. Another IRCC page lists “travel history, family ties to their home country, and employment” as key indicators.	It is not a finding that you lied or broke any law, and it is not a ban. It is the officer’s overall assessment from the file. Having a possible future plan to immigrate does not by itself stop a person from being a visitor, as long as the officer is satisfied they will leave (Act 22(2)).	There is no formal appeal for a visitor visa refusal. IRCC says to reapply only if something has changed or you have new documents that address the stated reasons; the same information is likely to give the same result, even with a consultant (IRCC Help Centre). Other options: an informal reconsideration request, or leave and judicial review at the Federal Court (below).
Purpose of visit (a factor officers weigh; your letter may word it differently)	The officer was not convinced that the trip makes sense for the reason given, or that the purpose is a genuine short visit (IRCC Report to Parliament; IRCC visa page on being a genuine visitor).	The invitation, itinerary, relationship to host, stated reason for travel and how it fits your life.	It does not mean the purpose is bad in itself. A changed purpose is one of the changes IRCC says can justify a new application.	As for s.179(b) above.
Travel history (a factor officers weigh)	The officer saw too little past travel, or past travel that did not help show a pattern of returning home. IRCC names it as one of its indicators.	Passport stamps, earlier visas, and records of trips and returns.	It does not mean a first-time traveller cannot get a visa. IRCC names travel history as one indicator among several.	As above.
Family ties in Canada and in the home country (a factor officers weigh)	The officer weighed relatives in Canada against family and obligations at home.	Documents showing who lives where and your responsibilities at home.	It does not mean having relatives in Canada is a bar, nor that family at home guarantees a visa. IRCC lists both as factors.	As above.
Employment (a factor officers weigh)	The officer was not satisfied that the job situation shows a reason or ability to return, or the job was not verified.	Employer letter, pay records, business registration and leave arrangements.	It does not mean unemployed people cannot be approved; it is one factor.	A change in employment is one of the changes IRCC says can justify a new application.
Financial status or insufficient funds (a factor officers weigh)	The officer was not satisfied that you have enough money for the stay, or that the funds are real and sourced. IRCC’s visa page says you need enough money for the length of stay, and mentions whether you are staying in a hotel or with family.	Bank statements, income proof, who pays, and trip costs.	It is not the same as being inadmissible for financial reasons under s.39 of the Act, which is a different finding about being unable or unwilling to support yourself or dependants without suitable arrangements.	As above. A change in finances is another change IRCC lists.
Inadmissible / not admissible: Regulations 179(e); Act s.36, 38, 39, 41	The person falls under a ground in the Act that stops entry: criminality (s.36), medical (s.38), financial (s.39), or non-compliance such as an earlier overstay (s.41). IRCC lists these among its inadmissibility reasons.	Court records (criminality), a medical exam, earlier immigration history.	It is not a general lack-of-ties finding. Each ground is assessed case by case (IRCC).	Depends on the ground. IRCC lists criminal rehabilitation and changed medical reasons as changes that can support a new application.
Misrepresentation: Act s.40(1)(a)	A person is inadmissible for directly or indirectly misrepresenting or withholding key facts on a relevant matter that leads, or could lead, to an error in how the Act is applied (Act 40(1)(a)). The Act sets the inadmissibility period at five years (40(2)(a)). IRCC describes this as giving false information or withholding information related to a decision.	Forms, documents, answers and anything submitted. Section 16(1) requires honest answers to every officer question and production of documents the officer reasonably requires.	It is not the same as an ordinary refusal for not being satisfied you will leave; it is a separate and heavier finding. Whether a particular error counts is for the officer to decide.	Under section 40(2)(a), a person found inadmissible for misrepresentation outside Canada continues to be inadmissible for five years after the final determination, and section 40(3) bars an application for permanent resident status in that period. A temporary resident visa can be issued only if the person is not inadmissible (Regulations 179(e)). IRCC material says applicants are given an opportunity to respond to concerns (next row).
Procedural fairness letter (a letter giving you the chance to respond to concerns)	IRCC describes procedural fairness as giving applicants the opportunity to respond to an officer’s concerns (IRCC committee material on fraud detection).	Whatever the letter lists, for example concerns about documents or statements.	It is not a refusal and not yet a finding.	Read the letter for what it asks and the time it gives, and reply within that time with truthful information and any supporting documents.
Request for reconsideration (an informal option, not part of the letter)	An informal request to the visa office to look at the decision again, by webform, email or mail (IRCC Report to Parliament).	A specific reason, for example not following procedural fairness, or a clerical error.	IRCC’s report says the applicant must satisfy the officer that reconsideration is justified. It does not pause the Federal Court deadline.	See the routes below. The deadline for judicial review keeps running.

What the letter does and does not say

The letter gives the general reason. It is not a full account of what the officer weighed. The officer decision note, where sent, explains more, and some parts may be removed.
Neither the letter nor the note is a promise of what will happen on a new application.
IRCC says phone agents cannot tell you more about the case than what is available online.

Getting more detail officially

Check whether an officer decision note came with the refusal letter (visitor visas are included). If it did not, and you apply to the Federal Court, IRCC says to state in the court application that the reasons were not received, even if a decision note was received, so that the Registry can request the reasons from the tribunal under Rule 9 of the Federal Courts Citizenship, Immigration and Refugee Protection Rules.
You can ask IRCC for your own personal information under the Privacy Act. IRCC’s page says citizens, permanent residents and foreign nationals can use it, wherever they are. Methods are the online ATIP portal, form IMM 5563, a Treasury Board form, or a letter naming the Act with enough detail for IRCC to find the records. If a representative applies for someone else, consent form IMM 5744 is needed.
A request under the Access to Information Act is a separate route, and IRCC’s page says it is for citizens, permanent residents or people in Canada.

Review options

No formal appeal for a visitor visa refusal (IRCC Help Centre).
Reapply with something new that answers the stated reason.
Reconsideration: informal and discretionary.
Judicial review at the Federal Court needs the Court’s permission first (leave). The deadline is 15 days if the matter arose in Canada and 60 days if it arose outside Canada, counted from the day you are notified of the matter or otherwise become aware of it (Act s.72(2)(b)). The deadline is short. A judge of the Court may allow an extended time for special reasons (s.72(2)(c)).

Sources for this section (official pages)

UNITED KINGDOM

UK Standard Visitor Refusal Wording

Where this wording appears

The visa refusal notice sent after a Standard Visitor application made from India. Home Office guidance for decision makers says refusal reasons must be factual, clear and relevant to the application, and backed by evidence (Visit guidance, section 6). It also says visa refusals use one of two letter templates, depending on whether a human rights appeal applies (section 6.3).
References to Appendix V: Visitor. The Immigration Rules for visitors are in Appendix V (paragraphs labelled V followed by a number). The genuine visitor test is paragraph V 4.2, which has five lettered parts, (a) to (e). A published Upper Tribunal decision reproduces an earlier visitor refusal notice, written under the version of the Rules then in force, that cited paragraph V 4.2(a), (c) and (e), with a closing sentence saying there was no right of appeal and no right to administrative review. A paragraph number, a lettered part and a short explanation of what the decision maker was not satisfied about is the pattern to expect.
References to Part Suitability. Appendix V paragraph V 3.1 says an applicant must not fall for refusal under Part Suitability. Suitability refusals cite a SUI paragraph number, and Home Office guidance says they must refer to the relevant paragraph (Visit guidance, section 13.1).
Applications rejected as invalid. Paragraph V 2.6 lets the Home Office reject an application as invalid, for example where the fee, biometrics or identity document is missing. That is different from a refusal: the application is not considered on its merits.

How the test works, in brief: the decision maker asks whether you have shown, on the balance of probabilities (more likely than not), that you meet the visitor requirements (Visit guidance, section 6). If the decision maker is not satisfied on any one requirement, the application is refused (V 16.1).

Sentences from a UK Standard Visitor refusal notice

The sentence as it appears	Plain-English meaning	What it usually points to	What it does not mean	Official route afterwards
“I have refused your application for a visit visa because I am not satisfied that you meet the requirements of paragraph(s) V4.2 of Appendix V: Visitor because:” Source: Refusal notice reproduced by the Upper Tribunal in R (Dutta) v Secretary of State for the Home Department	The opening of a Standard Visitor refusal. The reasons paragraphs that follow explain why the decision maker was not satisfied on V 4.2.	The reasons paragraphs under it, and the lettered parts of V 4.2 cited at the end ((a) to (e)).	It does not say which lettered part failed until you read the closing line.	No administrative review, and a right of appeal only where a human rights claim was made; your notice states what applies.
“On the evidence before me, and the balance of probabilities, I am not satisfied that you have accurately presented your circumstances or intentions in wishing to enter the UK.” Source: Refusal notice reproduced by the Upper Tribunal in R (Begum) v Entry Clearance Officer (a similar sentence appears in R (Dogar) v Secretary of State for the Home Department)	The decision maker did not accept that the application gave an accurate picture of your circumstances or plans, usually because documents and statements did not fit together.	Form answers, employer letter, salary, bank statements and itinerary, read together.	In these notices it sits under V 4.2 (a) and (c) and cites no SUI paragraph. A deception finding is a separate ground (SUI 9.1); check whether your notice cites it.	A new application is decided on its own evidence.
“Taking all of the above into account, I am therefore not satisfied that you are a genuine visitor who will leave the UK at the end of your visit or who is genuinely seeking entry for a purpose that is permitted by the visitor routes. Your application has therefore been refused under paragraph V4.2 (a) and (c) of the Immigration Rules.” Source: Refusal notice reproduced by the Upper Tribunal in R (Begum) v Entry Clearance Officer	The conclusion and the closing line. In V 4.2, (a) is that you will leave the UK at the end of the visit and (c) is that you are genuinely seeking entry for a permitted purpose. V 4.2 has five lettered parts, (a) to (e).	The whole file: purpose, funds, ties and history.	It is not an accusation that you plan to overstay or to work. It is a conclusion that the evidence did not settle those two questions.	As above.
“I am not satisfied you have demonstrated any economic ties that would necessitate your departure from the UK.” Source: Refusal notice reproduced by the Upper Tribunal in R (Begum) v Entry Clearance Officer	Job, business, property or dependants at home were not shown, to the decision maker’s satisfaction, to be a reason to go back.	Employer letter with role, salary and length of employment, business registration and accounts, property, and dependants (Home Office guide to supporting documents).	It does not say you have no ties.	As above.
“While I note there are some credits that correspond the stated income, the overall statement does not match your declared income and spending.” Source: Refusal notice reproduced by the Upper Tribunal in R (Begum) v Entry Clearance Officer (a similar sentence in R (Dutta): “this statement does not show credits in congruent with your stated income”)	Bank credits and spending did not fit the income you declared.	Bank statements read against salary slips, tax returns and the application form.	It does not set an amount. Home Office guidance sets no fixed amount; funds are compared with likely costs and continuing income (Visit guidance, section 8.1).	As above.
“The documents provided also do not demonstrate the origin of funds seen in your savings deposit.” Source: Refusal notice reproduced by the Upper Tribunal in R (Begum) v Entry Clearance Officer (a similar sentence in R (Dutta): “these documents do not establish the source of this income”)	The origin of a deposit, or of the income, was not shown.	Statements and records showing where the money came from; the guidance allows checks on funds that arrived recently.	It is not a finding that the money is not yours.	As above.
“The information you have provided has not satisfied me that your self-employment is settled and established in your home country, which damages the overall credibility of the statements made in your application and leads me to doubt that you intend to depart the UK at the end of your proposed visit.” Source: Refusal notice reproduced by the Upper Tribunal in R (Dutta) v Secretary of State for the Home Department	The business was not shown to be an established reason to return, and that lowered the weight given to the rest of the application.	Business registration, accounts, tax returns, premises and clients.	It does not say that self-employed applicants are refused.	As above.
“There is a clear discrepancy between your documents and your stated circumstances. … leads me to doubt that you have given a credible account of your financial or employment circumstances” Source: Refusal notice reproduced by the Upper Tribunal in R (Dutta) v Secretary of State for the Home Department	Two parts of the file conflict, and the conflict reduced the credibility given to the account as a whole.	The form, employer letters and bank records, side by side.	It is not a ground by itself; it feeds the V 4.2 (a) and (c) conclusion.	As above.
“this bank statement represents funds used for the activities and running of the business … You have not demonstrated that you are a signatory to this account. Furthermore these funds do not necessarily reflect an individual’s personal financial circumstances” Source: Refusal notice reproduced by the Upper Tribunal in R (Dogar) v Secretary of State for the Home Department	Money in a business account was relied on as personal funds without showing that you control the account or that the funds were available for personal use.	Proof that you are a signatory or owner, and personal accounts.	It does not say business funds can never be used. The link between the account and you was not shown.	As above.
“the information provided in support of your application does not show what other family you have in your country of residence. On the balance of probabilities I am not satisfied that you have demonstrated that you have ties to your home country which would encourage you to leave should you be granted entry to the UK.” Source: Refusal notice reproduced by the Upper Tribunal in R (Dogar) v Secretary of State for the Home Department	Family ties at home were not evidenced in the application.	Marriage and birth certificates, dependants, and household details.	It does not say what was missing beyond the family detail.	As above.

Wording or reference	Plain-English meaning	Evidence it relates to	What it does not mean	Official route afterwards
V 4.2(a): the applicant will leave the UK at the end of the visit	The decision maker was not satisfied, on the papers, that you would go back to India (or your country of residence) when the visit ends.	Home Office guidance tells decision makers to look at personal and economic ties to the country of residence, job and income, family and social background, past travel and immigration history, and whether the reasons given are believable and fit your background (Visit guidance, sections 7.2 to 7.5). It says a good record of complying with immigration law elsewhere can help, that first-time travellers need other evidence, and that few family or economic ties at home can raise doubt.	It is not an accusation that you plan to overstay or lie. It is a conclusion that the evidence did not settle the question. It is not a ban on applying again.	There is no administrative review for a Standard Visitor refusal, because the visitor route is not in the list in paragraph AR 1.1. There is a right of appeal only where the application included a human rights claim, and then only on the ground that the decision is unlawful under section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998. Your notice states which applies (see Right of review or appeal, below).
V 4.2(b): the applicant will not live in the UK for extended periods through frequent or successive visits, or make the UK their main home	The decision maker was worried the visits add up to living in the UK in practice.	Visit guidance section 7.4: how long and how often you stay, visits in the last 12 months, whether time in the UK exceeds time at home, whether trips abroad are only to re-enter the UK, ties and long-term commitments at home, and signs of UK residence. There is no fixed maximum period.	It does not mean a single long visit is a problem in itself, and it does not apply to a first visit in the way it applies to repeat visitors.	As above.
V 4.2(c): the applicant is genuinely seeking entry for a permitted purpose	The decision maker was not satisfied that the trip is what you say it is, or that what you plan to do is allowed for a visitor. Permitted activities are set out in a separate part of the Rules (Appendix Visitor: Permitted Activities), and V 13.3 covers permitted paid engagements.	Guidance section 7.1 says a visitor may do several permitted things but should have a main reason for visiting that they can explain and detail. Evidence is the purpose, itinerary, invitation or event details, and whether they fit your background and circumstances. The Home Office guide to supporting documents says business events need an invitation from the organiser.	It does not mean the purpose was judged to be dishonest. It can mean the purpose was unclear, unsupported, or did not fit your circumstances.	As above.
V 4.2(d): the applicant will not carry out activities prohibited by V 4.4 to V 4.6	The decision maker thought you might work, study (beyond what is allowed), get non-private medical treatment, marry or form a civil partnership (unless on the matching route), or take payment from a UK source (apart from listed exceptions).	Paragraphs V 4.4 to V 4.6 list what visitors may not do. Evidence is whatever the application says about the purpose, plans and who is paying.	It is not a finding that you did any of these things; it is a finding that the decision maker was not satisfied you would not.	As above.
V 4.2(e): the applicant has sufficient funds for all reasonable costs of the visit without working or using public funds	The decision maker was not satisfied your money covers the whole trip (including return travel and any dependants) and that it is genuinely yours or genuinely available. The money must be held in a type of institution that the Rules allow (V 4.2(e) refers to Appendix Finance, paragraph FIN 2.1).	Visit guidance section 8.1: no fixed amount is set; the decision maker compares your documents against likely costs and continuing income, takes off ongoing home commitments such as rent, mortgages and dependants, and checks where recently arrived funds came from. The supporting documents guide says bank statements should show where funds came from, and that an employer letter should give role, salary and length of employment.	It is not a statement that you are too poor to travel. It does not set a number you were short by.	As above.
V 4.3: a third party paying for travel, maintenance or accommodation	The decision maker was not satisfied that the person supporting you meets the conditions: a genuine personal or professional relationship with you, not in breach of immigration law, and able and willing to support you for the whole stay.	Visit guidance section 8.2: the relationship, the sponsor’s own funds for themselves, dependants and you, and their history of sponsoring visitors. The supporting documents guide says to show what support is given, how, the relationship, and that they can afford it.	It is not a finding that your host or sponsor did anything wrong unless the letter says so separately.	As above.
V 4.1, or the phrase V 4.2 to V 4.6	A short way of saying the decision maker has to be satisfied on all of the visitor requirements together. One unmet part is enough for refusal.	The whole application: forms, documents and answers.	It does not mean every part failed.	As above.
Not satisfied	Standard wording for a decision made on the balance of probabilities, which means more likely than not, rather than proof beyond doubt.	See the specific paragraph cited.	It does not mean the decision maker found a lie.	As above.
V 3.1 (suitability) and any SUI paragraph	The application was refused, or could be refused, on a general-grounds basis that is about you or your conduct, separate from the visitor eligibility test. Visit guidance section 7.1 says the genuine-intentions test and the suitability test are separate.	Depends on the SUI paragraph. See the next rows.	It does not automatically mean the V 4.2 test was also failed.	The refusal notice states whether any right of appeal or review exists.
SUI 9.1 (deception)	A mandatory refusal where the decision maker is satisfied that false representations, false documents or false information were used in connection with the application, or that relevant facts were not disclosed.	Documents and answers in the application: bank statements, employer letters, invitation letters, answers on the form. The table of re-entry periods in SUI 12.1, row (f), gives a 10-year period for someone who used deception in an application, and for visits that row applies to entry clearance applications.	It is a serious finding and is not the same as not being satisfied on the evidence. SUI 9.1 applies where the decision maker is satisfied that deception was used.	Check the refusal notice for the reason cited and for any appeal or review wording.
SUI 10.1 (false representations or non-disclosure)	A discretionary (may) refusal where false representations, documents or information, or a failure to disclose relevant facts, were made by the applicant or by a third party. Part Suitability says this applies whether or not the matter was relevant and whether or not the applicant knew.	As above, and also anything supplied by an agent, sponsor or other third party on your behalf.	May refuse is a choice for the decision maker. SUI 10.1 is a discretionary ground; SUI 9.1 is the mandatory one.	As above.
SUI 11.1 and 11.2 (previous breach of immigration law)	Refusal because of an earlier breach (for example overstaying or breaching conditions) in the UK or on earlier applications. 11.1 is mandatory within a set re-entry period; 11.2 is discretionary outside that period where immigration controls were also frustrated.	Home Office records of earlier stays and applications.	It is not relevant to someone with a clean UK history.	As above.
SUI 5.4 (criminality, visitor route)	A mandatory refusal for an applicant with a particular kind of recent conviction or out-of-court disposal on record (time limits in the paragraph apply).	Criminal record disclosure in the application.	It does not apply to a person with no such record.	As above.
No right of appeal or administrative review (statement in the letter)	The letter is telling you that this decision does not carry either route.	Not evidence-related.	It does not mean you cannot apply again, and it does not mean the decision was correct or incorrect.	See Right of review or appeal, below.
Application rejected as invalid (V 2.6)	The application was not considered because a basic validity item (fee, biometrics, identity document or correct form) was missing.	Application form, fee, biometrics and passport.	It is not a refusal on the merits.	The letter explains what to do; the Rules say an invalid application may be rejected and not considered.

Right of review or appeal

Appeal. Home Office rights-of-appeal guidance says a visit visa refusal carries a right of appeal only where the application included a human rights claim. Where an appeal does arise it is limited to the ground that the decision is unlawful under the Human Rights Act. The GOV.UK appeals overview does not list visit visas as such.
Administrative review. The Rules say a refused entry clearance application is eligible for administrative review only if it falls under a route named in paragraph AR 1.1 of Appendix Administrative Review. A visitor route is not in that list. The GOV.UK administrative review page says your decision letter states whether you can ask for review.
Reconsideration requests. The GOV.UK page for reconsideration requests is for people who are in the UK and applied from inside the UK for certain applications, so it is not a route for an application made from India.
In practice, read the closing paragraph of your own letter. It will state which routes, if any, apply.

Reapplying

Appendix V sets no waiting period before a new visitor application after a refusal on the evidence.
Home Office guidance tells decision makers to consider a person’s earlier immigration history, including visits to the UK and other countries (Visit guidance, sections 7.2 and 7.3). Past non-compliance elsewhere, such as removal or refused entry, may count against genuineness depending on the circumstances. A finding of deception in an earlier application is listed as a reason for doubt (section 7.5).
The GOV.UK administrative review page says a review request is rejected or withdrawn if another application is made, so the choice between asking for review (where it is available) and applying again matters. Read your own letter.
Accuracy matters most on repeat applications. Part Suitability treats false information or failure to disclose relevant facts as a ground for refusal (SUI 9.1 and 10.1 above).
After a refusal for deception, Part Suitability SUI 12.1 row (f) lists a 10-year period for entry clearance applications for visits, counted from the date of refusal. Each new application is decided on its own evidence.

Sources for this section (official pages)

SCHENGEN AREA

Schengen Short-Stay Visa Refusal Wording

Where this wording appears

The standard refusal form. Article 32(2) of Regulation (EC) No 810/2009 (the Visa Code) says a refusal and its reasons must be given on the standard form in Annex VI, in the language of the deciding country and another EU language. If a country is handling the file for another country (representation), the form still follows the same layout.
How it looks. The form is a tick-box list. The consulate ticks refused, then ticks one or more numbered reasons. Some reasons have a blank to fill, for example naming the country that issued a Schengen alert or specifying a matter on which the statements were doubted. There are lines for additional remarks, then an appeal section where the country must state the national law, the authority to appeal to and the time limit, then a stamp, a date, and a signature line if required by national law.
Two numbering schemes. The current text of Annex VI has 17 numbered reasons. An older version of the form has 11 (it combines several of today’s separate reasons). Match the wording on your own form, not only the number. The table gives the older number beside each current one, using the Commission’s visa handbook table that maps new numbers to old ones.
Authority behind the form. Article 32(1)(a) covers a false travel document, no justification of purpose and conditions of the stay, no justification of airport transit, no proof of means of subsistence, 90 days already used in the current 180 days, a Schengen alert, a threat to public policy, internal security, public health or international relations, and no travel medical insurance. Article 32(1)(b) covers reasonable doubts about the authenticity or content of documents, the reliability of the applicant’s statements, or the intention to leave before the visa expires.

How to read the table

The numbers follow the current text of Annex VI. The plain-English meaning, evidence and what-it-does-not-mean columns are IndoWorld’s own explanation of the official sources, not official wording, and the evidence column is a plain reading of what each ground is about, not an official checklist. Reasons 1, 2, 3 to 9, 15 and 16 correspond to Article 32(1)(a); reasons 10 to 13 correspond to the reasonable-doubts ground in Article 32(1)(b). The form allows more than one box to be ticked.

Wording or reference	Plain-English meaning	Evidence it relates to	What it does not mean	Official route afterwards
Reason 1 (older form: 1). “A false/counterfeit/forged travel document was presented”	The passport or travel document itself was found to be not genuine.	Your passport or travel document.	Doubts about supporting documents such as bank statements are covered by reason 12, not reason 1.	Appeal under the national law stated on the form (Article 32(3)).
Reason 2 (older form: 2). “Justification for the purpose and conditions of the intended stay was not provided”	The consulate was not shown a clear, supported reason for the trip: why, where, for how long, and under what conditions.	Itinerary, bookings, invitation or event papers, accommodation, who is paying, and dates.	It is not a statement that the purpose is false (that would be reason 10 or 11).	As above.
Reason 3 (older form: 3). “You have not provided proof of sufficient means of subsistence, for the duration of the intended stay or for the return to the country of origin or residence, or for the transit to a third country into which you are certain to be admitted”	The funds shown did not clearly cover the stay and the journey back.	Bank statements, income evidence and sponsor papers.	It does not state an amount you needed or how short you were.	As above.
Reason 4 (older form: 3). “You have not provided proof that you are in a position to lawfully acquire sufficient means of subsistence, for the duration of the intended stay or for the return to the country of origin or residence, or for the transit to a third country into which you are certain to be admitted”	The consulate was not shown that the money is available to you lawfully or that you can lawfully get it.	Source and availability of funds.	It does not by itself say money came from an unlawful source; it says that was not shown.	As above.
Reason 5 (older form: 4). “You have already stayed for 90 days during the current 180-day period on the territory of the Member States on the basis of a uniform visa or a visa with limited territorial validity”	The days already used in the rolling 180-day window leave no room for the new trip.	Your past travel dates in the Schengen area.	It is a counting rule, not a judgement about your honesty. It stops mattering once enough days have dropped out of the window.	As above.
Reason 6 (older form: 5). “An alert has been issued in the Schengen Information System (SIS) for the purpose of refusing entry by … (indication of Member State)”	Another authority has entered an alert saying you should be refused entry.	Records held on you in the system.	It is a different thing from a normal refusal reason and is not about the documents you submitted.	As above. The form names the issuing country, which is where to direct questions about the alert.
Reason 7 (older form: 6). “One or more Member States consider you to be a threat to public policy or internal security”	At least one Schengen country objected on public policy or internal security grounds.	Not application documents; it comes from consultation between countries.	It is not about the quality of your application.	As above. If the objection came from another country, the Commission handbook says that country must be identified on the form (see Appeal rights, below).
Reason 8 (older form: 6). “One or more Member States consider you to be a threat to public health as defined in point (21) of Article 2 of Regulation (EU) No 2016/399 (Schengen Borders Code)”	At least one Schengen country objected on public health grounds.	As for reason 7.	As for reason 7.	As for reason 7.
Reason 9 (older form: 6). “One or more Member States consider you to be a threat to their international relations”	At least one Schengen country objected on international relations grounds.	As for reason 7.	As for reason 7.	As for reason 7.
Reason 10 (older form: 8). “The information submitted regarding the justification for the purpose and conditions of the intended stay was not reliable”	The consulate did not find what you gave about the trip’s purpose and conditions believable.	Your form answers, itinerary, accommodation and other trip papers, taken together.	It is not a finding of fraud by itself; reason 12 concerns documents specifically.	As above.
Reason 11 (older form: 8). “There are reasonable doubts as to the reliability of the statements made as regards … (please specify)”	The consulate doubted something you said, and the form has space to say what.	Interview answers or statements on the form.	If the specified line is blank, the form has not told you which statement. It does not mean the doubt was about all your answers.	As above.
Reason 12 (older form: 8). “There are reasonable doubts as to the reliability, as to the authenticity of the supporting documents submitted or as to the veracity of their contents”	The consulate doubted that a document was genuine, or doubted that what it says is true.	Employment letters, bank statements, bookings, invitation letters and similar papers.	Reasonable doubts is not the same as a proven forgery.	As above.
Reason 13 (older form: 9). “There are reasonable doubts as to your intention to leave the territory of the Member States before the expiry of the visa”	The consulate was not convinced you would go back on time.	Ties to India as shown: job, family, property, studies, past travel record and plans.	It is not an accusation that you plan to stay. It is a conclusion that the file did not settle the question.	As above.
Reason 14 (older form: 10). “Sufficient proof that you have not been in a position to apply for a visa in advance, justifying application for a visa at the border, was not provided”	Only relevant if a visa is requested at the border. Not for ordinary consulate applications from India.	Reasons shown for not applying earlier.	It is not relevant to a normal consulate application.	As above.
Reason 15 (older form: 2). “Justification for the purpose and conditions of the intended airport transit was not provided”	This relates to an airport transit visa, not a normal short stay.	Transit papers.	It is not relevant to a normal tourist or business short stay.	As above.
Reason 16 (older form: 7). “You have not provided proof of possession of adequate and valid travel medical insurance”	Insurance was missing, or not shown to be adequate and valid.	The insurance certificate and what it covers.	It does not say which part of the cover was inadequate.	As above.
Reason 17 (older form: 11). “Revocation of the visa was requested by the visa holder”	A visa already issued was revoked because the holder asked.	Not relevant to a first refusal.	It is not a finding about the quality of an application.	Revocation of a visa based on this reason is not subject to the right of appeal (note to Annex VI).

The legal standard and the appeal section of the form

The sentence as it appears	Plain-English meaning	What it usually points to	What it does not mean	Official route afterwards
“the obligation on the competent authorities of a Member State to issue a uniform visa is subject to the condition that there is no reasonable doubt that the applicant intends to leave the territory of the Member States before the expiry of the visa applied for, in the light of the general situation in the applicant’s country of residence and his individual characteristics, determined in the light of information provided by the applicant.” Source: Koushkaki, Court of Justice of the European Union (Grand Chamber), operative part, point 2	This is the legal standard behind reasons 11 to 13: the question is whether a reasonable doubt exists, judged from the general situation in your country of residence and your own characteristics, using the information you provided.	The information you gave about your job, family, property and plans.	The same ruling says the authorities have a wide discretion in assessing the facts, and cannot refuse unless one of the listed grounds for refusal applies.	Appeal under the national law printed on your form (Article 32(3)).
“You may appeal against the decision to refuse/annul/revoke a visa. The rules on appeal against decisions on refusal/annulment/revocation of a visa are set out in (reference to national law) … Competent authority with which an appeal may be lodged (contact details) … An appeal must be lodged within (indication of time-limit)” Source: Visa Code, Annex VI (the standard refusal form); the bracketed items are blanks the deciding country fills in	Every standard form has an appeal section. The deciding country writes in its national law, the authority and the time limit.	The blanks printed on your own form.	The Visa Code itself sets no single time limit for all countries; your form states the limit that applies to you.	Use the national route printed on the form. Two examples follow, from official pages; each country sets its own.
“An appeal against the refusal of a visa may be lodged with the Regional Administrative Court (T.A.R.) of Lazio within 60 days of notification of the decision.” Source: Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Visa refusal page	For a refusal by Italy, the ministry names the Lazio regional administrative court and a 60-day time limit from notification.	The date you were notified of the refusal.	The ministry says the refusal decision must be reasoned. The page does not say anything about the outcome of an appeal.	The route stated on that page; check your own form and the ministry page.
“The applicant against whom a refusal decision has been issued may challenge it within 30 days by filing an appeal by post … Before the Deputy Director of Visas in the case of a short-stay visa … This prior appeal, which must be justifiable, written in French and signed, is mandatory before any appeal to the administrative judge.” Source: France-Visas, Frequently asked questions, “What to do in case of refusal?”	For a short-stay refusal by France, the first step is a prior written appeal to the Deputy Director of Visas, in French and signed, within 30 days, before any court appeal.	The date of the refusal decision and the reasons given.	It does not say what the appeal will decide. For a long-stay visa the appeal goes to a different body (the CRRV), as the same page states.	The route stated on that page; check your own form.

Older 11-reason form

The older form has: 1 false travel document; 2 purpose and conditions not justified; 3 no proof of funds (or lawful means); 4 already stayed three months in the current six-month period (the older wording used three and six months where the current text says 90 and 180 days); 5 Schengen alert; 6 threat to public policy, internal security, public health or international relations (one box); 7 insurance; 8 information on purpose and conditions not reliable; 9 intention to leave could not be ascertained; 10 border application not justified; 11 revocation requested by the holder.

Appeal rights

What the Visa Code says. Article 32(3): applicants who are refused have a right to appeal. The appeal is brought against the country that took the final decision, under that country’s national law. The form must carry information on the appeal procedure.
What the form must say. The appeal section asks the country to state the national law, the authority the appeal goes to, and the time limit. The Visa Code itself does not set one time limit for all countries, so the deadline printed on your own form is the one that applies to you.
Representation cases. The Commission’s handbook says that where one country decides for another, appeals go against the country that took the final decision (the representing country).
Court access. The handbook says applicants must be informed of the possibility to seek review before a court, and that the right to an effective judicial remedy under Article 47 of the EU Charter must be ensured.
Where the ground comes from another country’s objection (reasons 7 to 9). In joined cases C-225/19 and C-226/19 the Court of Justice held that a tick in the box is not enough. The decision must name the objecting country and the specific ground, with the essence of its reasons where appropriate, and tell the applicant which authority to contact about remedies there. The courts of the refusing country cannot review the substance of the other country’s objection but can check that procedure and the duty to give reasons were respected.
One example, for Germany. The German missions’ India page says the informal remonstration review is no longer offered at its visa sections in India. The options it names are to apply again at any time, or to file a lawsuit at the administrative court in Berlin within one month of receiving the refusal. It adds that the visa section will not give further explanations by email beyond the reasons in the letter and cannot give legal advice. This is specific to Germany; each country sets its own appeal route.

What the form does not tell you

Which document or answer caused the doubt. Reasons 10 to 13 are broad boxes. The form has a field for specifying a matter under reason 11 and remarks lines, but the form text does not require the documents to be listed.
What would fix it. The form states a reason, not what evidence would have satisfied the consulate.
How strongly the officer weighed each item. A ticked box does not show how close the decision was.
Whether other countries’ consulates would decide the same way. Each country decides its own applications; the form is the record of one decision.
A waiting period. Article 32 itself sets no waiting period before applying again, and the German mission page says a new application can be made at any time. The refusal is recorded in the EU visa database (Article 32(5)).
Anything about your future applications. Nothing on the form says a later application will succeed or fail.

Sources for this section (official pages)

AUSTRALIA

Australia Visitor Visa (Subclass 600) Refusal Wording

Where this wording appears

The refusal notice. Under section 66 of the Migration Act 1958, a refusal notice must name the visa criterion that was not met (or the legal provision that blocked the grant) and give written reasons. Where a right of review exists, it must also state that the decision can be reviewed, the time limit, who can apply and where (section 66(2)(d)). Home Affairs says it will tell you why the visa was refused and whether you have a right to a review of the decision. Look in your letter for criterion numbers such as 600.211 or 4020.
The decision test. Section 65 of the Act says the decision maker must grant the visa if satisfied that all criteria are met and no legal provision blocks it, and must refuse if not so satisfied. So refused here means not satisfied that every criterion was met. It does not mean found to be lying or found to be a bad traveller.
Where the criteria live. For subclass 600 the criteria are in Schedule 2 of the Migration Regulations 1994. The Tourist stream uses the common criteria (clauses 600.211 to 600.215) plus the Tourist stream criteria (clauses 600.221 to 600.225). The Public Interest Criteria (PICs, numbers starting with 4) are in Schedule 4, and the Special Return Criteria (numbers starting with 5) are in Schedule 5.
The Home Affairs visa page describes the requirements in everyday terms: a genuine visitor, enough money, health, character, and debts to the Australian government paid or arranged.

Route afterwards, for every row below

First read the review statement in your notice: Home Affairs says it tells you whether you have a right of review. An applicant who applied from outside Australia generally has no right of ART review under section 338(2), which requires an application made in Australia. A new application that deals with the specific criterion named in the letter is open to you, unless a row says otherwise.

Home Affairs wording behind an Australian refusal notice

The sentence as it appears	Plain-English meaning	What it usually points to	What it does not mean	Official route afterwards
“Be a genuine visitor. You must only intend to: stay temporarily in Australia; obey any condition and stay period attached to your visa.” Source: Home Affairs, Visitor visa (subclass 600), Tourist stream (apply outside Australia): the requirement behind clause 600.211	This is how Home Affairs states the requirement a refusal under clause 600.211 refers to. A refusal here means the officer was not satisfied that you meet it.	Proof that you have reasons to return home, such as an employer letter, proof of study, immediate family at home and assets, and your plans in Australia (Home Affairs examples).	It is not a finding that you are dishonest, and it is not a ban.	See the notice, then Review, appeal and reapplication below.
“Have enough money. You must have, or have access to, enough money to support yourself while you are in Australia.” Source: Home Affairs, Visitor visa (subclass 600), Tourist stream (apply outside Australia): the requirement behind clause 600.212	The requirement a refusal under clause 600.212 refers to: money for your own support during the stay, whether yours or accessible to you.	Home Affairs examples: itemised personal bank statements for a 3 month period, pay slips, audited accounts, tax records, term deposits and credit card statements; proof of the host’s funds if the host is paying.	The clause sets no fixed amount.	As above.
“If we refuse your visa we will let you know in writing. We will tell you why we refused your visa and whether you have a right to a review of the decision.” Source: Home Affairs, Visitor visa (subclass 600), Tourist stream (apply outside Australia)	The refusal notice states the reason and whether a right of review exists. Read that statement in your own notice before deciding what to do.	Your notice and its attached decision record.	It does not say that review is available. An applicant who applied from outside Australia generally has no right of ART review under section 338(2).	A new application that answers the criterion named in the notice, or whatever route your notice states.

Wording or reference	Plain-English meaning	Evidence it relates to	What it does not mean	Official route afterwards
Clause 600.211, which Home Affairs calls Be a genuine visitor: you genuinely intend to stay temporarily for the purpose the visa is granted for	The officer was not satisfied that you really plan a temporary visit for the stated purpose and that you would follow the visa conditions. The rule says the officer looks at whether you complied substantially with the conditions of your last visa, whether you intend to comply with this visa’s conditions, and any other relevant matter, which is why the whole picture counts. Home Affairs adds that you must intend to stay only temporarily and obey the conditions and stay period.	Home Affairs lists as examples: proof of enough money, an invitation letter from a relative or friend if you will stay with them, your plans while in Australia, and proof of reasons to return home (an employer letter confirming return to your job, proof of study, immediate family at home, assets such as a house, proof you can return).	It is not a finding that you are dishonest. It is not a permanent ban. It does not mean the officer thinks you plan to stay illegally; it means the evidence did not satisfy them.	A new application with better evidence is possible. Merits review depends on the letter (see Review, appeal and reapplication, below).
Clause 600.212: adequate means to support yourself (or access to adequate means) for the whole intended stay	The officer was not satisfied you have, or can reach, enough money for the trip. Access to means can include money from someone else, such as a relative paying, but Home Affairs says if another person will pay, you should prove their funds.	Home Affairs examples: itemised personal bank statements covering a 3 month period, pay slips, audited accounts, tax records, term deposits and credit card statements.	The clause sets no fixed dollar amount. It does not mean you were found to have faked money (that would be PIC 4020, below).	A new application with clearer money evidence, consistent with the rest of the file.
Clause 600.221 (Tourist stream purpose): you intend to visit a close relative who is an Australian citizen or permanent resident (parent, spouse, de facto partner, child, brother or sister), or to visit for another purpose that is not business or medical treatment	The stated purpose of your trip did not fit the Tourist stream.	Your invitation, itinerary and the purpose you gave in the form.	It does not mean your reason was disbelieved, only that it fell outside this stream, for example business activity or medical treatment, which have other routes.	Apply under the stream that fits the real purpose, if one exists (for instance the Business Visitor stream).
Clause 600.215 (exceptional circumstances): applies only if the grant would let you stay more than 12 months in a row on visitor visas, a Working Holiday or Work and Holiday visa, or bridging visas combined	The officer decided that the total continuous time you would spend in Australia on these visa types goes beyond 12 months, and no exceptional circumstances were shown.	A request for a longer stay and the reasons, for example for parents of an Australian citizen or permanent resident. Home Affairs says to tell them in the application if you want a longer visa.	It does not mean visitor visas can never be long. It only becomes an issue past the 12 month mark.	A new application with a shorter stay, or a suitable longer-stay visa if the real plan is long.
Public Interest Criterion (PIC) 4020: false or bogus information or documents	The test is whether there is evidence that you gave, or caused to be given, a bogus document or information that was false or misleading in a material particular, in the application or in a visa held in the previous 12 months. It also covers identity: a separate part requires you to satisfy the officer about your identity.	A forged, altered or wrongly obtained document, or information that is false or misleading in a material particular. The Act defines bogus document to include one that was altered without authority, was not issued for the person, or was obtained because of a false or misleading statement, whether or not that statement was made knowingly.	The definition of a bogus document turns on what the Minister reasonably suspects and includes a document obtained because of a false or misleading statement, whether or not it was made knowingly. Home Affairs asks you to let it know as soon as you can if you made a mistake on your application. Clause 4020(3) applies the criterion whether or not the Minister became aware of the bogus document or information because of information you gave. It does not apply to a refusal for weak funds on its own.	If this ground is the reason for refusal, the same criterion looks back 3 years for any earlier refusal of this kind for you or a family member (an applicant under 18 at the earlier time is excluded), and for identity-based refusals the look-back is 10 years. The criterion allows the Minister to waive the requirement where compelling circumstances affect Australia’s interests, or compassionate or compelling circumstances affect an Australian citizen, permanent resident or eligible New Zealand citizen (clause 4020(4)). Home Affairs says anyone you appoint to give immigration assistance must be a registered migration agent, a legal practitioner or an exempt person.
PIC 4001 and the character test (section 501 of the Migration Act 1958)	The officer was not satisfied that you pass the character test. Home Affairs lists examples: a substantial criminal record, certain sexual offences against minors, association with groups reasonably suspected of criminal conduct, past and present conduct showing you are not of good character, and risk factors such as danger to the community.	Criminal convictions or pending charges in any country (these must be declared), police certificates, military certificates, and forms such as the Statement of Character.	It does not mean any past offence automatically blocks you: officers consider all circumstances and the Minister can still grant. Non-disclosure is itself a risk.	Home Affairs says its decision letter tells you if you have a right of review. A decision made by the Minister personally can only be challenged by judicial review. If refused on character grounds since last arrival, Home Affairs says the only visa you may apply for is a Protection visa, and a refusal under section 501 after leaving Australia means you cannot meet Special Return Criterion 5001.
PIC 4005 (health)	The officer was not satisfied you meet the health requirement. Clause 600.213 applies PIC 4005 to subclass 600. It requires the applicant to be free from tuberculosis, free from a disease or condition that is a threat to public health or a danger to the Australian community, and free from a condition likely to result in significant health care or community service costs or to prejudice access to those services for Australian citizens and permanent residents. For a temporary visa the period looked at is the period the visa is intended for. A Medical Officer of the Commonwealth gives the advice.	Health examination results if requested.	It does not mean you are unwell. Home Affairs states the Medical Officer looks at the kind and severity of condition for a hypothetical person and cannot take your private insurance or money into account.	Home Affairs says its decision letter tells you if you have a right of review. Its health pages describe health undertakings and say a health waiver is available for some visa subclasses.
PIC 4013 (earlier visa cancelled)	A visa you held before was cancelled for specified reasons, for example false or misleading information, working without authority, or breaching certain visa conditions, and the new application was made within 3 years of the cancellation.	Your immigration history in Australia.	It does not apply to people who never held an Australian visa that was cancelled.	The criterion lets an application succeed if made more than 3 years after the cancellation, or if the decision maker is satisfied that compelling circumstances affecting Australia, or compassionate or compelling circumstances affecting a citizen, permanent resident or eligible New Zealand citizen, justify an earlier grant.
PIC 4014 (left Australia unlawfully or on certain bridging visas)	You left Australia as an unlawful non-citizen, or on certain kinds of bridging visa, and applied within 3 years of leaving.	Your Australian movement history.	There are exceptions, for example leaving within 28 days after a substantive visa ended. It does not apply to someone who has never been to Australia.	The same type of 3 year rule and the same exception path as 4013.
PIC 4011 (risk of staying beyond permission)	Applies only if you have a specific risk factor: you applied for permanent residence in Australia in the 5 years before this application, or you share all the characteristics of a class of persons set out in a legislative instrument made by the Minister. Then you must satisfy the officer there is very little likelihood you would remain after your permitted stay, considering your circumstances in your usual country.	The reasons you will go home, shown in your home-country circumstances.	It does not apply to everyone.	A new application with evidence on the home-country ties point.
PIC 4004 (debts)	You owe money to the Australian government and no suitable payment arrangement exists.	A previous debt such as a medical or visa-related bill.	It does not matter if no debt exists.	Pay or arrange payment, then reapply.
PIC 4021 (passport)	You do not hold a valid passport from an official source in the issued form, unless it is unreasonable to expect one.	Your passport.	It does not mean refusal for passport expiry alone unless this criterion is cited.	Fix the passport issue, then reapply.
PIC 4012, 4017 and 4018 (applicant under 18)	For an applicant under 18: PIC 4012 (an undertaking about accommodation and welfare where the child will stay with someone who is not a relative and without parents), PIC 4017 (home-country law permits removal, or those who decide where the child lives consent, or the grant is consistent with an Australian child order) and PIC 4018 (no compelling reason to believe the grant would not be in the child’s best interests).	Consent forms and undertaking forms listed by Home Affairs (Form 1229 for consent and Form 1257 for an undertaking from the person the child will stay with).	It is not a comment on the family.	A new application with the correct consent and care documents.
Special Return Criteria 5001, 5002 and 5010	They bar a grant if you were previously removed or deported (5002 sets a 12 month wait after a removal unless compelling or compassionate circumstances apply), had a visa cancelled or refused on certain character grounds (5001), or are linked to certain student-visa government funding rules (5010).	Past removal, deportation or cancellation records.	They do not apply to someone who was never removed, cancelled or refused on those grounds.	As stated in each criterion.
Incomplete or missing documents (not a separate criterion)	A section 65 refusal is still based on a criterion. Home Affairs says it may decide an application without asking for more information. The Migration Act 1958 lets the applicant add information until a decision is made (section 55), lets the officer invite more information (section 56), and requires the officer to give the applicant particulars of relevant information that would be the reason, or part of the reason, for refusal and was not given for the application (other than non-disclosable information and information about a class of persons), and to invite comment (section 57). So the officer may or may not write for more before deciding.	Everything listed on the Home Affairs Gather your documents step, including English translations of non-English documents.	It does not mean the officer will always write and ask for missing items before deciding.	A new application with a complete file.
Sponsorship or security criteria (clauses 600.224 and 600.225 in the Tourist stream, clause 600.235 in the Sponsored Family stream): where the Minister has required a sponsor, or a security (bond) was asked for	The required sponsorship was not approved or not in force, or the requested security was not lodged.	Sponsor documents and the security payment.	Not relevant to ordinary self-funded or invitation-letter applications unless the Minister required a sponsor or security.	The review route differs here: see Review, appeal and reapplication, below.

Review, appeal and reapplication

Where the answer lives. Where a right of review exists, the notice must state that the decision can be reviewed, the time limit, who may apply and where (section 66(2)(d) of the Act). The Administrative Review Tribunal (ART) says your Home Affairs decision letter will tell you if the ART can review the decision and if you are a person who can apply for a review. The ART can review only decisions that the Migration Act 1958 and Migration Regulations 1994 allow it to review. It states that time limits are strict and it has no power to extend them. Under section 347 of the Act the time limit to apply to the ART is 28 days after being notified (14 days if in immigration detention).
Applicant outside Australia. Section 338(2) gives a review right for a refusal only where the visa could be granted while the person is in Australia and the person applied while in Australia. Review applications by those persons also require them to be physically in Australia (section 347A(2)). That route fits someone who applied from inside Australia, not an Indian applicant who applied from India.
Sponsor or relative routes. For visas that cannot be granted inside Australia, sections 338(5) to (7) give review rights to a sponsor or nominator (or, in the visit-a-relative situation in section 338(7), the relative) rather than the applicant, and section 347A says that person is the one who applies. Your letter will tell you; some sponsor or relative situations may allow the Australian sponsor or relative to apply.
Security-related refusals. Regulation 4.02(4)(f) of the Migration Regulations 1994 makes a refusal tied to a security (bond) criterion a reviewable decision. This links to clauses 600.225 and 600.235, which apply only when a security is asked for.
Character-related refusals. Home Affairs’ character page says the ART is responsible for reviewing the merits of departmental decisions, that a decision made by the Minister personally can be challenged only by judicial review, and that judicial review may be possible if you believe the decision had a legal error. Appeals have strict time limits.
Options. The options are ART review (if the notice says you have it), judicial review through the Australian courts if you believe the decision had a legal error (strict time limits apply), or a new application.
Reapplication. The subclass 600 criteria set no waiting period after a refusal on the evidence. The look-back rules in the criteria are in PIC 4020 (3 years and 10 years for refusals based on bogus or false information and identity), PIC 4013 and 4014 (3 years after a cancellation or unlawful departure), Special Return Criterion 5002 (12 months after removal), and the character consequences above. Each application is judged against the criteria at the time of decision.
Agents. Home Affairs says anyone you appoint to give immigration assistance must be a registered migration agent, a legal practitioner or an exempt person.

Effect on future applications

A refusal under 600.211 or 600.212 is a decision on that application. The next officer assesses the new file against the criteria in force at the time of decision. Home Affairs says bogus documents or false and misleading information may lead to refusal of your application, cancellation of your visa, restrictions on future applications and possible legal action.
A refusal or cancellation involving false or bogus information has defined look-back periods under PIC 4020 (see the table).
Home Affairs describes giving altered or false documents as unlawful, and says it can lead to refusal, cancellation, restrictions on future applications and legal action. Section 234 of the Migration Act 1958 and section 137.1 of the Criminal Code Act 1995 are the offence provisions it cites.
Character-based refusals or cancellations have the strongest effects (Special Return Criterion 5001, and the Protection-visa-only rule after a character refusal or cancellation since last arrival).

Sources for this section (official pages)

NEW ZEALAND

New Zealand Visitor Visa Decline Wording

Where this wording appears

Terminology. Immigration New Zealand (INZ) says declined rather than refused for visas.
Reasons. INZ’s Operational Manual (which contains the immigration instructions under section 22 of the Immigration Act 2009) tells officers that if they are not satisfied all requirements are met and an exception is not justified, they must decline, and must give written reasons to the applicant or their agent (instruction E7.35). Section 27 of the Immigration Act 2009 separately gives a right to reasons on request to people who applied onshore or in an immigration control area.
Where the requirements are written. The Visitor Visa page on the INZ website summarises them. The detail is in the Operational Manual: visitor requirements (V2.1), the bona fide applicant test (E5.1, E5.5, E5.10), funds or sponsorship (V2.20), onward travel (V2.25), health (A4.15), character (A5.45) and false or withheld information (A24.10 with section 58 of the Immigration Act 2009).
The instructions use the words bona fide applicant, funds or sponsorship, onward travel, acceptable standard of health and character requirements, and a letter may use some of these terms.

Route afterwards, for every row below

For a visitor visa applied for from outside New Zealand, the official route is a new application. Reconsideration is a formal right only for certain onshore applicants (see Review, appeal and reapplication, below). Section 186(1) and (2) of the Immigration Act 2009 provide that no appeal lies against a decision on a temporary entry class visa, whether to any court, the Tribunal, the Minister or otherwise, except the section 185 reconsideration for onshore applicants. Section 186(3) also excludes court review proceedings for a refusal to grant a temporary entry class visa to a person outside New Zealand.

INZ wording behind a decline for weak ties

The sentence as it appears	Plain-English meaning	What it usually points to	What it does not mean	Official route afterwards
“When you travel to New Zealand on a temporary visa, your intentions must be genuine. This means that you: plan to stay in New Zealand temporarily; are coming for the reason you gave in your visa application or New Zealand Traveller Declaration (NZTD); will comply with the conditions of your visa; will not stay in New Zealand without a valid visa, and have plans to leave New Zealand at the end of your stay.” Source: Immigration New Zealand, Genuine intentions to visit or work in New Zealand	INZ’s own description of the genuine-intentions (bona fide) test that a decline for weak ties refers to.	INZ lists example evidence: travel history, accommodation bookings, a letter from your employer approving leave and confirming return, evidence of close relatives and assets at home, and a ticket out or funds to buy one.	It is not an accusation of dishonesty. INZ says you must answer truthfully and provide genuine evidence.	For an application made from outside New Zealand, a new application (see the route box below).

Wording or reference	Plain-English meaning	Evidence it relates to	What it does not mean	Official route afterwards
Bona fide applicant (Operational Manual E5.1). Immigration New Zealand (INZ) describes this as being a genuine visitor who intends to leave at the end of the visit	The officer was not satisfied that you genuinely plan a temporary stay for a lawful purpose, and that you are not likely to stay unlawfully, breach visa conditions, or be unable to leave or be removed.	INZ’s genuine-intentions page and E5.10 list what is looked at: your evidence, your travel history, any earlier overstays or breaches in New Zealand, family members in New Zealand without a visa, the strength of family ties in your home country and in New Zealand, personal, financial and work commitments, and anything that might discourage you from going home. Example evidence on the INZ page: passport pages showing travel history, hotel and accommodation bookings, a letter from your employer approving leave and confirming return, and evidence of close relatives and assets at home.	It is not a finding that you lied. It does not mean you can never visit. Under section 58(2) of the Immigration Act 2009 the officer may determine the application on the information, evidence and submissions provided.	A new application with better evidence. Reconsideration only in the limited onshore case.
Funds: enough money to live on, or an acceptable sponsor (V2.20)	The officer was not satisfied that you will have enough money for the stay, or that an acceptable sponsor covers it.	The stated amounts are at least NZD 1,000 per month for maintenance and accommodation, or NZD 400 per month if accommodation is prepaid. The funds must be genuinely available for the whole visa. INZ examples: bank or credit card statements, bank drafts, traveller’s cheques and proof of prepaid accommodation. Statements should show the account is in your name, the bank and the currency. A sponsor completes the Sponsorship Form for Temporary Entry and can show their own documents (INZ page: supporting documents such as recent bank statements and pay slips).	It is not an accusation of faked statements. Having a sponsor does not help if the sponsor evidence was missing.	A new application with clear funds or sponsor evidence.
Onward travel: show you can leave (V2.25)	The officer was not satisfied you have the means to leave New Zealand.	A ticket out of New Zealand to a country you can enter, or statements showing you could buy one. INZ says the ticket money must be in addition to your living funds. A sponsor can show funds if you do not have a ticket.	It does not require a ticket in every case, since proof of funds to buy one is also accepted.	A new application showing a ticket or funds.
Lawful purpose and conditions (V2.1.1)	Your stated reason did not fit visitor use. Visitors may holiday, sightsee, visit family and friends, play amateur sport, and some other purposes; they may not intend to take employment or a programme of study (apart from limited short-term study).	Your purpose statement and itinerary.	It does not mean visiting for a wedding or event is excluded; the INZ genuine-intentions page lists getting married and amateur sport as acceptable visitor reasons.	Apply under the visa type that fits the real purpose.
False or misleading information, or withheld information (section 58(6) of the Immigration Act 2009; instruction A24.10)	Section 58(6) makes it a sufficient ground to decline if the officer is satisfied that you, personally or through an agent, submitted false or misleading information or withheld relevant information that was potentially prejudicial to the grant of the visa, or did not make sure an officer was told of a material change in circumstances. Instruction A24.10 says applications with false, misleading or withheld information will normally be declined, and that an officer must not decline under section 58(6) without considering the circumstances of the application. Under A24.5, section 58(6) cannot be used where the false, misleading or withheld information was in a previous application; the character instructions at A5.45 apply to that situation.	Anything in the application, including documents given through an agent. INZ says the decision letter will state if it found false or misleading information, even when the application is approved.	It is a more serious finding than weak evidence. Section 58(6) applies whether the information was submitted personally or through an agent. INZ will not decline a future application for this reason if the person was under 18 at the time, was a dependent child and the problem concerned someone else, or the matter is connected to a report of migrant exploitation that INZ has assessed as credible.	A new application: INZ says a cover letter can explain the circumstances and why the character requirement should be waived. INZ may waive the character requirement, considering how significant the information was, your intentions and involvement, and your effort to give accurate information before.
Character requirements (sections 15 and 16 of the Immigration Act 2009; INZ character page; A5.45)	The officer was not satisfied about your character. Under sections 15 and 16 of the Immigration Act 2009 no visa may be granted to a person who has been sentenced to imprisonment for 5 years or more at any time, or for 12 months or more in the preceding 10 years, who is subject to a period of prohibition on entry, or who has been removed, deported or excluded from New Zealand or removed, excluded or deported from another country, or to a person the Minister has reason to believe is likely to commit an offence in New Zealand that is punishable by imprisonment or is, or is likely to be, a threat or risk to security, public order or the public interest. Section 17 allows a visa to be granted by special direction. For temporary entry, instruction A5.45.5 also provides that a person will not be granted a visa, unless granted a character waiver, if convicted at any time of an immigration, citizenship or passport offence in any country, of any offence for which they were imprisoned, or of a New Zealand offence carrying a possible sentence of three months or more.	Police certificates (INZ page: for people 17 or older whose total time in New Zealand will be 24 months or longer, and when asked), declared convictions and charges, and any removal or deportation.	It does not mean any past issue is final: INZ can grant a character waiver or special direction, which may be requested when you apply.	A new application that declares the matter and asks for a waiver where relevant. INZ describes special direction as given only in rare circumstances.
Character: earlier false information (A5.45.5; INZ false-information page)	For an earlier New Zealand application, A5.45.5(c) says a person will not be granted a temporary entry class visa if they, personally or through an agent, made a false or misleading statement or provided false or misleading information, evidence or submission, or withheld material information, or if they gave false or misleading information in support of another person’s application.	Your previous New Zealand applications.	It is not necessarily permanent: A5.45 allows the visa to be granted if a character waiver is granted. Under A5.45.6 the officer does not have to decide whether the applicant knew the information was false or intended to deceive, information given by an agent counts even if the agent did not know it was false, and a forged or altered document counts as false even if its contents are true. For withheld information the officer must be satisfied the applicant or agent knew the information. The exceptions include a person under 18 at the time, a dependent child, and a case where an officer recorded that the incident was not an issue of character requiring a waiver.	See the false or misleading information row.
Acceptable standard of health (A4.15; INZ health pages)	The officer was not satisfied you meet the health standard. For temporary visas this means you are unlikely to be a danger to public health, and unlikely to impose significant cost or demand on New Zealand health services during your stay (INZ gives hospitalisation, residential care, high-cost medicines and high-cost disability services as the kinds of need it looks at).	A chest X-ray or medical examination when requested (INZ visitor page: normally not needed for a stay under 6 months for the X-ray, and a medical certificate not normally needed for under 12 months, but INZ may ask).	It does not take into account private health insurance, the ability to pay, or family support: INZ states these are not considered. Instruction A4.65 limits medical waivers for temporary entry class visas to the groups it lists, such as the partner or dependent child of a New Zealand citizen or residence class visa holder.	A new application. Medical waivers for temporary entry class visas are limited to the groups listed in A4.65.
Incomplete application (not a separate criterion)	Section 58(1) and (2) of the Immigration Act 2009 put the responsibility on the applicant to supply all information, evidence and submissions with the application. The officer is not obliged to ask for more and may decide on what is provided. INZ’s Visitor Visa page says incomplete or incorrect information can cause delays and that INZ may decline the application.	The INZ document checklist on the Visitor Visa page (passport copy, photo, proof of funds, proof of plans, proof of leaving, translations of non-English documents).	It does not mean INZ never asks for more: for applicants outside New Zealand, fairness instructions (E7.15) say INZ should give you a chance to comment on potentially prejudicial information that did not come from you and that you have not seen.	A new application with a complete file.
Previous immigration history in New Zealand (E5.10; INZ genuine-intentions page)	Past overstay, breach of conditions, or having a dependant unlawfully in New Zealand is weighed in the bona fide decision.	INZ records of earlier stays.	A single earlier visit without problems is not a negative.	A new application addressing the history.
Declined by another country (INZ genuine-intentions page)	INZ asks that, if any other country ever declined a visa for you, you provide that letter, or a letter explaining the outcome if the original is not available.	The refusal letter from the other country.	It does not mean an earlier refusal elsewhere causes an automatic decline. Hiding it is the risk: INZ treats false or withheld information seriously.	Include the document with a new application.
Passport validity (INZ Visitor Visa page)	Your passport or certificate of identity must be valid for at least 3 months after the date you plan to leave New Zealand.	Your passport.	It is a requirement for the application, as INZ states it.	Renew the passport and apply again.

Review, appeal and reapplication

INZ’s own page, How to get a temporary visa decision reviewed. If a visitor, work or student application was declined, you can ask INZ to reconsider only if all of these are true: you applied while in New Zealand, you are still in New Zealand when you ask, you still hold a valid visa (an interim visa can count), and INZ receives the request within 14 calendar days of you receiving the decline. Another officer who was not the original decision maker does the review. The result is final: a second reconsideration is not allowed. The page states a fee; check it there.
The same rule in the Act and the Manual. Section 185 of the Immigration Act 2009 limits the reconsideration right to an onshore applicant for a further temporary visa who is still lawfully in New Zealand, applies within 14 days, and where the decision was not made by the Minister. Instruction E7.35.1 repeats this.
Applicants outside New Zealand. An Indian applicant who applied from India therefore has no formal reconsideration right. The Operational Manual adds that officers are not legally obliged to reconsider a declined offshore temporary application but may do so if new and compelling information is promptly provided (E7.35.1). That is a discretion, not a right. INZ’s page says that if your situation has changed and you think you might now qualify, you should submit a new application with all relevant information.
Appeals. Section 186(1) and (2) of the Immigration Act 2009 provide that no appeal lies against a decision on a temporary entry class visa, to any court, the Tribunal, the Minister or otherwise, except the section 185 reconsideration. Section 186(3) excludes court review proceedings for a refusal to grant a temporary entry class visa to a person outside New Zealand. The Immigration and Protection Tribunal appeal rights in section 187 are for residence class visas, and INZ’s If your visa is declined page mentions the Tribunal only for residence class visas.
Reapplication. Section 79 of the Immigration Act 2009 says a person outside New Zealand may apply for a temporary visa. Each new application is assessed on its own.

Effect on future applications

A decline for weak evidence (bona fide, funds, onward travel) is not described as a bar. A new application is judged on its own evidence, but INZ looks at previous applications as part of the picture (genuine-intentions page).
A finding of false or misleading information, or withheld information, can affect later applications: INZ says any future visa application may be declined on character grounds if you, or someone acting for you, gave false or misleading information or withheld relevant information in a visa application or an expression of interest. INZ may consider a character waiver and will ask you to explain why one should be granted. The exceptions INZ lists (under 18, dependent child, credible migrant-exploitation report) are described in the table.
Convictions, removals and deportations can make you ineligible under sections 15 and 16 of the Immigration Act 2009, subject to a special direction under section 17, and the temporary entry character instructions (A5.45.5) apply unless a character waiver is granted.

Sources for this section (official pages)

WHAT THE LETTER DOES NOT TELL YOU

Reading Between the Lines, Carefully

A refusal is about one application

What a letter typically leaves out

Which document or answer caused the doubt. On the Schengen form, for example, reasons 10 to 13 are broad boxes and the form text does not require documents to be listed.
What would fix it. The Schengen form states a reason, not what evidence would have satisfied the consulate. In Canada, IRCC says the letter gives the general reason and the officer decision note, where sent, explains more; some parts of the note may be removed.
How strongly each item was weighed. A ticked box or a cited paragraph does not show how close the decision was.
Whether another country would decide the same way. Each country decides its own applications, and each letter is the record of one decision.
Anything about a future application. Neither the Canadian letter nor the note is a promise of what will happen on a new application, and nothing on the Schengen form says a later application will succeed or fail.
A waiting period. For a refusal on the evidence, Appendix V (UK), Article 32 (Schengen) and the subclass 600 criteria (Australia) set no waiting period, and section 79 of the Immigration Act 2009 allows a person outside New Zealand to apply for a temporary visa. After a UK refusal for deception, SUI 12.1 lists a 10-year period for entry clearance applications for visits. For the USA, the standard letters say you may reapply at any time, with information not presented before.

Weak evidence and false information are different findings

Most visitor refusals say the decision maker was not satisfied on the evidence. That is not an accusation that you lied. A finding that false or misleading information was given is a separate and heavier kind of ground, and each destination treats it separately:

Destination	Reference	What the official sources say
USA	INA 212(a)(6)(C)(i)	Requires a false statement, made willfully, that is material, to get a benefit. The Manual calls this a permanent ineligibility, unlike 214(b).
Canada	Act s.40(1)(a)	Misrepresentation or withholding key facts. The Act sets the inadmissibility period at five years after the final determination.
UK	SUI 9.1 and 10.1	SUI 9.1 is a mandatory refusal for deception, with a 10-year re-entry period in SUI 12.1. SUI 10.1 is discretionary.
Schengen	Reasons 10 to 12	Doubts about the reliability of information, statements or documents. Reasonable doubts is not the same as a proven forgery.
Australia	PIC 4020	Bogus documents or false or misleading information, with look-back periods of 3 years and, for identity, 10 years.
New Zealand	Section 58(6); A24.10; A5.45.5	False, misleading or withheld information is a sufficient ground to decline (section 58(6)) and will normally be declined (A24.10). For a later temporary entry class visa, A5.45.5 provides that the person will not be granted the visa unless a character waiver is granted.

NEXT STEPS

What to Do Next

Practical steps that match the official routes

Read the whole letter, including the closing paragraph. It states the legal reference, and for the UK and Schengen it states whether any appeal or review exists. Home Affairs says its Australian notice tells you whether you have a right of review.
Keep a copy of the letter, and of any officer decision note (Canada) or written instruction (USA 221(g)).
Match each reference to the tables above and note what evidence it relates to.
Check the route the official source names: USA, no appeal and reapply with information not presented before; Canada, no formal appeal, reapply only if something has changed, or judicial review with its short deadline; UK, a fresh application unless the notice says otherwise; Schengen, appeal under the national law and deadline printed on the form; Australia, whatever the notice says about review, otherwise a new application; New Zealand, a new application, with reconsideration only for certain onshore applicants.
Before reapplying, ask what has actually changed. Canada’s IRCC says the same information is likely to give the same result, and the US Manual says a new application is judged on the facts at that time.
Answer every question truthfully on any new application, and give honest, consistent information.

What IndoWorld does

IndoWorld Visa and Education Services is a visa and immigration consultancy in Vadodara. We review your refusal letter and file, explain what the wording points to, and advise whether and how to reapply. We cannot overturn a decision, and we cannot guarantee an outcome: every decision is made by the government concerned.

Refusal reasons by destination: USA · Canada · UK · Schengen · Australia · New Zealand

QUESTIONS

Frequently Asked Questions

Does a refusal letter always list every reason?

Not necessarily. The letter has to name the legal provision, criterion or ground, but it does not show how each item was weighed or which document caused the doubt. In the USA the written refusal must name the legal provision. In Canada, IRCC says the letter gives the general reason, and for many application types an officer decision note explains more, with some parts possibly removed. In the UK the notice cites paragraphs of Appendix V. The Schengen form is a tick-box list that can have more than one reason ticked, with a blank to specify some matters. An Australian notice must name the criterion that was not met. Read your own letter first.

Can a visitor visa refusal be appealed in each place?

The official sources differ. USA: no appeal; you may reapply at any time. Canada: no formal appeal for a visitor visa; options are a new application, an informal reconsideration request, or leave and judicial review at the Federal Court, which has a short deadline. UK: no administrative review for a Standard Visitor refusal, and a right of appeal only where the application included a human rights claim; your notice states what applies. Schengen: a right of appeal under the national law of the country that took the decision, with the time limit printed on the form. Australia: Home Affairs says the notice tells you whether you have a right of review; an applicant who applied from outside Australia generally has no right of ART review under section 338(2). New Zealand: for an application made from outside New Zealand, a new application; formal reconsideration is for certain onshore applicants.

Should I reapply straight away without changing anything?

The official sources point the other way. For the USA, the standard letters say a new application should include information not presented before, and a new application is judged on the facts at that time. For Canada, IRCC says to reapply only if something has changed or you have new documents that address the reasons, and that the same information is likely to give the same result. For a refusal on the evidence, Appendix V (UK), Article 32 (Schengen) and the subclass 600 criteria (Australia) set no waiting period, and section 79 of the Immigration Act 2009 allows a person outside New Zealand to apply for a temporary visa. Each new application is assessed on its own evidence. After a UK refusal for deception, SUI 12.1 lists a 10-year period for entry clearance applications for visits.

Does wording like 214(b) or not satisfied mean I was accused of lying?

No. The USA 214(b) refusal is not a finding that the applicant lied. Canada’s s.179(b) is not a finding that the person lied or broke any law. UK V 4.2 wording means the evidence did not settle the question. Schengen reason 13 is not an accusation that you plan to stay. These are separate from findings of false or misleading information, such as INA 212(a)(6)(C)(i) in the USA, section 40 in Canada, SUI 9.1 in the UK, PIC 4020 in Australia and section 58(6) in New Zealand, which are heavier and are covered in the tables above.

Is a 221(g) result or an application rejected as invalid the same as a refusal?

Not in the same way. A US 221(g) is treated legally as a refusal even though it can be overcome: it is not a final no, and the Manual says it may be a request for documents or for administrative processing. If the refusal is less than one year old the case can be reopened without a new application. A UK application rejected as invalid under V 2.6 is not a refusal on the merits, because the application was not considered; the letter explains what to do.

My US letter says “You have not demonstrated that you have the ties that will compel you to return to your home country”. What does that mean?

It is a sentence from the State Department’s approved letter for a 214(b) refusal where ties were not shown (9 FAM 403.10-3(A)(3)(a)). The letter first says that you were found ineligible under Section 214(b) and were not able to demonstrate that your intended activities in the United States would be consistent with the visa classification. It then explains that applicants usually meet the residence-abroad requirement by showing strong ties overseas, such as professional, work, school, family or social links. The sentence means the officer was not satisfied that you have such a residence abroad that you do not intend to abandon. It is not a finding that you lied, and the Manual says the refusal must rest on your own circumstances, not on a profile such as young or single. The letter states that the decision cannot be appealed and that you may reapply at any time, with information that was not presented in your original application or showing that your circumstances have changed.

My UK refusal says “I am not satisfied that you have accurately presented your circumstances or intentions in wishing to enter the UK”. What does that mean?

This sentence appears in refusal notices reproduced in published Upper Tribunal decisions, under paragraphs V 4.2(a) and (c) of Appendix V: Visitor. It means the decision maker did not accept that the application gave an accurate picture of your circumstances or plans, usually because documents and statements did not fit together, for example bank credits against declared income, the origin of a deposit, or economic ties to your home country. It is a conclusion on the evidence under V 4.2. A finding of deception is a separate ground under SUI 9.1, and applies only if your notice cites it. A Standard Visitor refusal normally has no administrative review, and a right of appeal arises only where a human rights claim was made; your notice states what applies.

My Canadian officer note says “The applicant’s assets and financial situation are insufficient to support the stated purpose of travel”. What does that mean?

This sentence appears in officer notes reproduced in Federal Court decisions. It means the officer compared the funds shown in the file with this trip, its purpose and who is travelling, and was not satisfied the funds support it. It is a comparison with the trip, not with a fixed balance, and it does not state an amount you were short by. The officer’s overall conclusion in the same notes is paragraph 179(b) of the Regulations: not satisfied that the applicant will leave Canada at the end of the authorized stay. There is no formal appeal for a visitor visa; IRCC says to reapply only if something has changed or you have new documents that address the reasons.

My Schengen refusal ticks “There are reasonable doubts as to your intention to leave the territory of the Member States before the expiry of the visa”. What does that mean?

This is reason 13 on the standard refusal form in Annex VI of the Visa Code. It means the consulate was not convinced you would leave the Schengen area before the visa expires. In Koushkaki, the Court of Justice of the European Union said the obligation to issue a uniform visa is subject to the condition that there is no reasonable doubt about the applicant’s intention to leave, judged in the light of the general situation in the applicant’s country of residence and individual characteristics, using the information the applicant provided. It is not an accusation that you plan to stay. The appeal section of your form states the national law, the authority and the time limit for an appeal.

OFFICIAL SOURCES

Official Sources

Start with the official pages

Every table above links to its sources. These are the main official starting points for each destination.

Also see IndoWorld: official visa sources.

Want Someone to Read Your Refusal Letter With You? Talk to Us, Honestly.

SCHEDULE FREE CONSULTATION