Partner visa statements and AI confidentiality: what a relationship statement gives away in ChatGPT or Claude.

A partner visa application usually includes a written statement from each person describing the relationship: how they met, when they moved in, how they share money, what their families think. Agents help clients draft these from an interview, and staff often paste the interview notes into ChatGPT or Claude to produce the first version. The statement is the most intimate document in the file, and the applicant declares it true. This page marks every item in a typical relationship statement that the Code of Conduct and the Privacy Act bear on, and shows how the same draft is produced on Ermos inside the practice.

The partner visa relationship statement

Prepared with the client after the interview and attached to the partner visa application with other evidence of the relationship. Sections 15 and 20 of the Code of Conduct prohibit false or misleading statements, including to government officials.

Statement in support of a partner visa application
Prepared by Kingfisher Lane Migration from an interview on 22 October 2026 · 24 October 2026

The people.

How we met.

Where we live.

Our money.

Daniel’s health.

Daniel’s daughter.

Our families.

My visa.

Signed: Linh Tran.

An invented statement. Names, addresses, dates and places are invented, and the people do not exist. Hover or tap any highlighted item for the analysis; the full list is below.

What leaves the practice

  1. 1
    The applicant, her partner and his citizenship

    Full names, a birth date and birthplace, and that the partner is an Australian citizen. Personal information about two people, one of whom is not the practice’s client. Privacy Act guide.

  2. 2
    The relationship history

    Where and when they met, a first date, when they became a couple. Intimate detail that the applicant is relying on to prove the relationship is genuine. Privacy Act guide.

  3. 3
    The home address and the lease

    A residential address and that both names are on the lease. Where two named people live, and evidence the application relies on. Privacy Act guide.

  4. 4
    The couple’s finances

    Joint account contributions, rent and a partner covering groceries. Financial information about both people. Privacy Act guide.

  5. 5
    The partner’s illness and hospital

    A diagnosis, the hospital where he is treated and how it is managed at home. Health information about a third person, and sensitive information where the Privacy Act applies. Patient data guide.

  6. 6
    A child

    A named five-year-old, her preschool routine and the custody pattern. A minor’s personal information, and where she is on a Friday. Privacy Act guide.

  7. 7
    Religion and family conflict

    The parents’ faith, their reaction and a two-month silence. Religious beliefs are sensitive information under the Privacy Act, and family conflict is the sort of detail the client would not want repeated. Privacy Act guide.

  8. 8
    Visa status and expiry

    That she holds a graduate visa, the date it ends and her reason for applying. The deadline that drives the file. Privacy Act guide.

  9. 9
    The declaration

    The sentence the client signs. It is harmless to send, but any fact an AI draft adds or changes becomes a statement she declares true, and sections 15 and 20 of the Code prohibit false or misleading statements.

What happens in Frontier Models (ChatGPT, Claude)

  • The whole document is transmitted to the provider’s servers. On personal plans the user cannot choose where it is stored or processed, and for the major providers that has generally meant outside Australia, under that country’s legal process. Some business plans offer storage in Australia, but the provider still receives the content.
  • On consumer tiers, prompts can be retained and used to train future models.
  • The provider’s staff and systems can reach the content under the provider’s own policies.
  • Once sent, the practice no longer controls it. Retention and deletion happen on the provider’s terms.

The same document on Ermos

Ermos Dominion

The document is drafted on a unit in your office, from your own templates and the client file. Every marked item stays on the unit, which keeps working with the internet switched off. Nothing in it is transmitted to an AI provider, so there is no disclosure to analyse: the confidentiality work is the same as for your file server.

Ermos Edge

Your documents, the index and your access boundaries stay on your own instance in an Australian data centre. When a staff member asks for this draft, only their question and the excerpts they are permitted to see go to a named Australian provider, who is contractually barred from keeping the content or training any model on it. Nothing is processed outside Australia.

Frontier Models (ChatGPT, Claude)Ermos EdgeErmos Dominion
Where the document is processedProvider servers, generally offshore on personal plansYour instance in an Australian data centre; answers generated in AustraliaThe unit in your office
Who can read itProvider staff and systems, under policyYour staff, within the boundaries you set. The named Australian provider processes only permitted excerpts, under contract, and keeps nothingYour staff only
Is it keptOn the provider’s termsKept on your instance; the provider is barred from retaining itStays on the unit
Can it train a modelOn consumer tiers, yesNo, by contractOnly your own unit learns from it, on your hardware

Part of AI data leakage in migration practices.

Common questions

Do ChatGPT and Claude use the information in a partner visa relationship statement?
Yes, whatever is pasted from the interview notes or the statement is sent to the AI company's servers and processed there to produce a reply. As at October 2026, whether a conversation on a personal plan (ChatGPT Free, Plus or Pro; Claude Free, Pro or Max) can be used to train the models depends on a setting each user controls. Business plans (ChatGPT Business and Enterprise, Claude Team and Enterprise) and the developer APIs sit under commercial terms, and OpenAI and Anthropic each say they do not train on that content by default (OpenAI, Anthropic). On either product, the thumbs up and thumbs down buttons can send a whole conversation back for training. The statement describes how a couple met, a partner's Crohn's disease, a five-year-old daughter and a family's religious conflict.
Can we use ChatGPT or Claude for a partner visa statement if we remove the names?
No, because the story itself identifies the couple. Removing names rarely makes a document anonymous. Information stays personal information while the person is reasonably identifiable, and the OAIC warns that information can be at risk of re-identification even when it has been de-identified or anonymised. A first date at the Sydney Fish Market on 10 March, a lease in Strathfield, treatment at Concord Hospital and a daughter aged five describe one household. The Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) recommends in its guidance on commercially available AI products that organisations do not enter personal information, and particularly sensitive information, into publicly available generative AI tools, because of the significant and complex privacy risks.
Can ChatGPT or Claude remember the details in a partner visa relationship statement later?
They can. Both products also have memory features that can carry details from one conversation into later ones, and on a personal account each user decides whether they are switched on (ChatGPT, Claude). Staff often reuse the shape of one statement for the next couple. A partner's illness, a child's Friday pick-up or a family's two-month silence could follow the user into a later chat about another client. Those details belong to this couple.
How can a migration practice use AI for a partner visa relationship statement without sending it to ChatGPT or Claude?
Ermos is built so the document stays under your control. On the Dominion AI unit it is drafted inside your office and none of it is sent to an AI provider. On Ermos Edge your documents and index stay on your own instance in an Australian data centre, and only the question and the excerpts the user is permitted to see go to a named Australian provider that is contractually barred from keeping them or training any model on them. The first draft comes from the interview notes on the client file and the practice's own statement template. The client reads every line and the registered migration agent checks it, because anything a draft adds becomes a fact she declares true.
Can a model be allowed to polish a relationship statement?
Polishing grammar is low risk if the facts stay exactly as the client gave them. The danger is a draft that adds a detail, such as a date or a place. The client signs a declaration that the statement is true, and the Code of Conduct prohibits an agent making a false or misleading statement. The client reads the final version line by line.
Why does the partner's health matter if he is not the client?
Because the statement describes his diagnosis and hospital. Health information about a third person is still personal information, and it is sensitive information where the Privacy Act applies to the practice. Section 35 of the Code also stops an agent disclosing personal information relating to a client's affairs without the client's written consent.
Does the Privacy Act apply to a small migration practice?
Often not. A business with annual turnover of $3 million or less is generally outside the Privacy Act, unless an exception applies. The Code of Conduct still applies, and section 35 requires the client's written consent before personal information is disclosed to a third person. Whether pasting a statement into an AI tool is such a disclosure is the question OMARA's AI guidance raises.

See Dominion answering from your own documents.

A demonstration takes 30 minutes, uses no client data, and comes with no obligation.

Book a demo
Keep reading
AI data leakage in migration practices Resources The Privacy Act, the APPs and AI All professions