TRV for spouse and dependant

[InfoSeeker12]

Strange that sponsor's 100k wasn't enough... sounds more like a pretext. Was there any dependent or dependent of dependent? Or maybe the sponsor had some previous issues?

As far as i know, sponsor was citizen, has been in a good full time job and financially pretty much sound. No dependents. The only thing was trv was applied before spousal application. but the rejection letter clearly stated that officer was not convinced that $5k is enough for the visit. I dont know what the applicant/sponsor mentioned in the letter. if they did mention some crazy Canada tour plan, some huge family gathering, without actually researching costs - then obviously $5k is not enough for 6 months stay + those events.

 

[seadrag0n]

I just learned that the processing time for inland OWP for spouses is 5 months, is this true?

 

[Younes6888]

Hi to all i will apply for trv for my spouse i know most of u had already applied and was approved congartulations.. anyways question?

1. Which is better GCkey or new ircc portal to apply
2. I am the sponsor his representative will i use my email add or my spouse email add to apply for trv?
I will submit Imm 5476 for representative i know that.
Any help is appreciated

 

[comarxx]

Hi to all i will apply for trv for my spouse i know most of u had already applied and was approved congartulations.. anyways question?

1. Which is better GCkey or new ircc portal to apply
2. I am the sponsor his representative will i use my email add or my spouse email add to apply for trv?
I will submit Imm 5476 for representative i know that.
Any help is appreciated

Either portal or gckey it does not matter. I prefer the portal though. You can use your email to apply and also as a sponsor. For me its much easier to check the application and email.

 

[Sujmon]

Thank you. Invitation Letter, Marriage certificate, Sponsor's job letter and bank statement, Passport.

Congratulations!!. Can you share if you mentioned anything specific in the invitation letter and also as far as the financials are concerned, how much money did you show?

 

[Younes6888]

Either portal or gckey it does not matter. I prefer the portal though. You can use your email to apply and also as a sponsor. For me its much easier to check the application and email.

Thank you

 

[Mgillanders]

I'm also planning on applying for TRV for my spouse, but I just have few questions:

1. What do I list as "proof of means of financial support" if I'm the one who'll be covering the expense? She has job but in a 3rd world country, even a good paying job is not enough for Canada.

2. Proof of upfront medical exam: we've already done a medical test for the spousal visa, could we just link and use that for this?

We've already submitted our spousal application, and have received AOR, passed both sponsor eligibility and medical exam.

Any luck?

 

[Mgillanders]

Im thinking that due to this
On the issue of dual intent, this Honourable Court has found that the question of
whether an applicant would leave at the end of their authorized stay is a precondition of
dual intent.32 In other words, when an applicant fails to convince an officer that they would
leave Canada by the end of their authorized stay, dual intent does not become a relevant
factor for the officer to consider. Why not as the sponsor and husband make a affidavit sworn in front of the rcmp that I take full legal responsibility of the visitors departure financial and medical? Then if they refuse launch a judicial review and go public !

 

[comarxx]

Im thinking that due to this
On the issue of dual intent, this Honourable Court has found that the question of
whether an applicant would leave at the end of their authorized stay is a precondition of
dual intent.32 In other words, when an applicant fails to convince an officer that they would
leave Canada by the end of their authorized stay, dual intent does not become a relevant
factor for the officer to consider. Why not as the sponsor and husband make a affidavit sworn in front of the rcmp that I take full legal responsibility of the visitors departure financial and medical? Then if they refuse launch a judicial review and go public !

What does the sworn affidavit have to do with your application? I do not get this.

 

[Mgillanders]

What does the sworn affidavit have to do with your application? I do not get this.

It enhances the security and mitigates the risk of the applicant leaving the country also https://irb.gc.ca/en/forms/Pages/RadSar0417.aspx

 

[Kaibigan]

It enhances the security and mitigates the risk of the applicant leaving the country also https://irb.gc.ca/en/forms/Pages/RadSar0417.aspx

That's a nice idea, but not one likely to carry much weight. Boatloads of TRV applications fail every day on the "I am not satisfied you will leave" ground. It would be nice if that could be overcome by the simple device of having the spouse/sponsor swear an affidavit to the effect of "I solemnly swear that my spouse will leave Canada by his/her visa expiry date even if I have to hogtie him/her and carry him/her onto the plane myself".

If such an affidavit would be of any value, word would be out by now that such an affidavit will boost prospects of success greatly. They would be in routine use already. Too, as a practical matter, what if the sponsored spouse turns rogue and won't leave? What does the IRCC do with the affidavit? What would be the government's remedy?

One possible remedy would be to say the affidavit turned out to be false and to charge the deponent with perjury. That would not really solve the underlying problem. The ship jumper would still be here. What else? Maybe the IRCC could take the position that the content of the affidavit has contractual force and the IRCC could sue for damages for breach of contract. But then, what would be the measure of damages? It's trite law that damages must be proven. Of course, the IRCC really wants the miscreant spouse gone, so then the desired remedy would be what lawyers call "specific performance". You want the contracting party to do what they promised to do. But, will a court tell the deponent spouse: "You promised to get your spouse out of here, so go do it!" I know that won't happen, probably for reasons that require no explanation.

But, (and this is getting to be fun), let's ignore the reasons why a court won't order specific performance and suppose that a decree of specific performance is, mirabile dictu, granted. The spouse who is subject to the order then tries mightily to round up and ship out the wayward spouse, but fails in that effort. Now what? Well, the remedy then is for the IRCC to take the sponsor back to court and seek to have him/her held in contempt of the order for specific performance. As is usual in contempt proceedings, likely the spouse will be given a week or so to "purge" his/her contempt by doing what was ordered. If that fails, the IRCC can come back and seek a punishment for contempt, such as a fine or imprisonment, or both. All good clean fun, for sure.

Long ago on this forum, in one of some 400 posts I made here long since wiped out, I suggested a willingness to do much better than an affidavit. Anyone can swear an affidavit. I suggested putting one's money where one's mouth is. I suggested the sponsor spouse put up an irrevocable letter of credit or cash deposit, of, say, $50,000 or so. If the applicant spouse does not get on the plane, the sum is forfeited. Party time at the IRCC with the forfeited funds. I would be quite content to do that in our case. I know my wife would not elect to hide and choose to remain in Canada forever as an illegal, subhuman. Notwithstanding my sporting proposition, I was told that my idea sucked. I am not sure yours will fare much better in this honourable court of public opinion.

Thanks for the opportunity for diversion and flight of fancy.

 

[canuck78]

It enhances the security and mitigates the risk of the applicant leaving the country also https://irb.gc.ca/en/forms/Pages/RadSar0417.aspx

It would be incredible expensive and a nightmare to keep track of all of the visitors. It would also be incredibly expensive to pursue all the people who overstayed and many would appeal or apply for remain in Canada on various other grounds. Even if there was a large monetary deposit involved the amount of bureaucracy required to keep track of the deposits, monitor who is overstaying and pursuing the removal of the person who overstayed would require a huge amount of money which would be hard to justify for people to visit Canada. Can only imagine that those who submitted the deposits would then contest the fact that they were losing money when the other person was the one overstaying and include all the steps they had taken to try and force the person to return to their home country. In other countries you can basically drag someone on a plane and deport them without giving them access to a lawyer or even without travel documents. That isn’t possible in a Canada.

 

[Mgillanders]

That's a nice idea, but not one likely to carry much weight. Boatloads of TRV applications fail every day on the "I am not satisfied you will leave" ground. It would be nice if that could be overcome by the simple device of having the spouse/sponsor swear an affidavit to the effect of "I solemnly swear that my spouse will leave Canada by his/her visa expiry date even if I have to hogtie him/her and carry him/her onto the plane myself".

If such an affidavit would be of any value, word would be out by now that such an affidavit will boost prospects of success greatly. They would be in routine use already. Too, as a practical matter, what if the sponsored spouse turns rogue and won't leave? What does the IRCC do with the affidavit? What would be the government's remedy?

One possible remedy would be to say the affidavit turned out to be false and to charge the deponent with perjury. That would not really solve the underlying problem. The ship jumper would still be here. What else? Maybe the IRCC could take the position that the content of the affidavit has contractual force and the IRCC could sue for damages for breach of contract. But then, what would be the measure of damages? It's trite law that damages must be proven. Of course, the IRCC really wants the miscreant spouse gone, so then the desired remedy would be what lawyers call "specific performance". You want the contracting party to do what they promised to do. But, will a court tell the deponent spouse: "You promised to get your spouse out of here, so go do it!" I know that won't happen, probably for reasons that require no explanation.

But, (and this is getting to be fun), let's ignore the reasons why a court won't order specific performance and suppose that a decree of specific performance is, mirabile dictu, granted. The spouse who is subject to the order then tries mightily to round up and ship out the wayward spouse, but fails in that effort. Now what? Well, the remedy then is for the IRCC to take the sponsor back to court and seek to have him/her held in contempt of the order for specific performance. As is usual in contempt proceedings, likely the spouse will be given a week or so to "purge" his/her contempt by doing what was ordered. If that fails, the IRCC can come back and seek a punishment for contempt, such as a fine or imprisonment, or both. All good clean fun, for sure.

Long ago on this forum, in one of some 400 posts I made here long since wiped out, I suggested a willingness to do much better than an affidavit. Anyone can swear an affidavit. I suggested putting one's money where one's mouth is. I suggested the sponsor spouse put up an irrevocable letter of credit or cash deposit, of, say, $50,000 or so. If the applicant spouse does not get on the plane, the sum is forfeited. Party time at the IRCC with the forfeited funds. I would be quite content to do that in our case. I know my wife would not elect to hide and choose to remain in Canada forever as an illegal, subhuman. Notwithstanding my sporting proposition, I was told that my idea sucked. I am not sure yours will fare much better in this honourable court of public opinion.

Thanks for the opportunity for diversion and flight of fancy.

.
I disagree and see the best course of action is with affidavit. You have to address will they leave and do they have stronger ties to the homeland just in case they dont like it in Canada even though they want to move to Canada. Anyhow you have already undertaken responsibility with sponsorship once the person is here for 3 years even if you separate. All you can do is put your best foot forward and cover all your bases. To me if you spend 1100 for sponsorship the department should give a visitor visa once a certain stage has been reached for free.

It would be incredible expensive and a nightmare to keep track of all of the visitors. It would also be incredibly expensive to pursue all the people who overstayed and many would appeal or apply for remain in Canada on various other grounds. Even if there was a large monetary deposit involved the amount of bureaucracy required to keep track of the deposits, monitor who is overstaying and pursuing the removal of the person who overstayed would require a huge amount of money which would be hard to justify for people to visit Canada. Can only imagine that those who submitted the deposits would then contest the fact that they were losing money when the other person was the one overstaying and include all the steps they had taken to try and force the person to return to their home country. In other countries you can basically drag someone on a plane and deport them without giving them access to a lawyer or even without travel documents. That isn’t possible in a Canada.

Saying expensive and liberal Canadian government is crazy ! The CBSA keeps track. Monetary deposit for a 100 dollar visa is delusional thinking

 

[canuck78]

.
I disagree and see the best course of action is with affidavit. You have to address will they leave and do they have stronger ties to the homeland just in case they dont like it in Canada even though they want to move to Canada. Anyhow you have already undertaken responsibility with sponsorship once the person is here for 3 years even if you separate. All you can do is put your best foot forward and cover all your bases. To me if you spend 1100 for sponsorship the department should give a visitor visa once a certain stage has been reached for free.

Saying expensive and liberal Canadian government is crazy ! The CBSA keeps track. Monetary deposit for a 100 dollar visa is delusional thinking

The suggestion was 50k not $100.

The only responsibility is that you will repay welfare if your spouse uses the welfare system in the first 3 years so it isn’t a huge responsibility compared to the actual cost of using all the services people use. It is very difficult and expensive to remove someone once they reach Canada which is why sponsorship processing and interviews if you come from a non-visa exempt country have been done outside of Canada. People pay much more the $1100 for a visa or permit or to get smuggled into a country including Canada. If you everyone was granted a TRV if you have paid $1100 and your sponsorship has been undergoing processing for multiple months you welcome immigration fraud. Much cheaper to pay someone to marry you and sponsor you to get to Canada knowing that even if you are denied the sponsorship or you break off the relationship after arriving in Canada you are already in Canada and can try to remain. There is a good chance that you would already likely have a valid WP for a few years. You could appeal the sponsorship, you may qualify for express entry, you may remain without status or apply to remain based on H&C based on being established in Canada for example. The attempt to remove a spouse who had entered Canada during sponsorship process but was not in a true relationship or the relationship broke down before sponsorship approval would take years and cost the government a lot of money.

 

[Mgillanders]

The suggestion was 50k not $100.

The only responsibility is that you will repay welfare if your spouse uses the welfare system in the first 3 years so it isn’t a huge responsibility compared to the actual cost of using all the services people use. It is very difficult and expensive to remove someone once they reach Canada which is why sponsorship processing and interviews if you come from a non-visa exempt country have been done outside of Canada. People pay much more the $1100 for a visa or permit or to get smuggled into a country including Canada. If you everyone was granted a TRV if you have paid $1100 and your sponsorship has been undergoing processing for multiple months you welcome immigration fraud. Much cheaper to pay someone to marry you and sponsor you to get to Canada knowing that even if you are denied the sponsorship or you break off the relationship after arriving in Canada you are already in Canada and can try to remain. There is a good chance that you would already likely have a valid WP for a few years. You could appeal the sponsorship, you may qualify for express entry, you may remain without status or apply to remain based on H&C based on being established in Canada for example. The attempt to remove a spouse who had entered Canada during sponsorship process but was not in a true relationship or the relationship broke down before sponsorship approval would take years and cost the government a lot of money.

So your point is not to apply a legal stance at all, and what is your solution outside of changing internal policy legal approach that would not hold up in a judicial review? You missed the point of at a certain stage right now they judge the individual if they are going to leave the country before they take into effect dual intent with sponsorship which brings into play the applicants financial and ties. Solutions are needed