Spousal sponsorship and TRV

[logically]

Hey all,

My wife and I are about to begin the process of applying for PR outland. I'd be sponsoring her. We had tried twice unsuccessfully to get a TRV for her, both times being refused for the typical reasons (family ties, funds, employment ops). With the announcement that IRCC made last year regarding TRVs having a higher approval rate, if we began our PR, what's the likelihood that the TRV will be refused again? I know this is very hypothetical and case dependent, just wondering if anybody has had any experience with that.

Also, should we apply for TRV first, and then PR, or the other way around? Any tips or advice would be greatly appreciated.

 

[FraKra]

I did apply First for the PR and after disapproved outland SOWP I travelled to Canada and did the SOWP Inland application. My husband is canadian so he already is in Canada. My Inland SOWP was approved just a few days ago. So for me it was best doing it like that. Now we of course still need to wait for the PR.

 

[logically]

I did apply First for the PR and after disapproved outland SOWP I travelled to Canada and did the SOWP Inland application. My husband is canadian so he already is in Canada. My Inland SOWP was approved just a few days ago. So for me it was best doing it like that. Now we of course still need to wait for the PR.

So I’m guessing you already a visitor visa?

 

[FraKra]

So I’m guessing you already a visitor visa?

Yea an eTa since i am from germany.

 

[Kaibigan]

Hey all,

My wife and I are about to begin the process of applying for PR outland. I'd be sponsoring her. We had tried twice unsuccessfully to get a TRV for her, both times being refused for the typical reasons (family ties, funds, employment ops). With the announcement that IRCC made last year regarding TRVs having a higher approval rate, if we began our PR, what's the likelihood that the TRV will be refused again? I know this is very hypothetical and case dependent, just wondering if anybody has had any experience with that.

Also, should we apply for TRV first, and then PR, or the other way around? Any tips or advice would be greatly appreciated.

There seems to be some anecdotal evidence of TRVs having a higher approval rate since the big "announcement". But the minister in charge (Sean Fraser) is no longer minister and I don't know if his successor has echoed the announcement.

I hae not followed too closely, but my impression is that those getting TRVs for spouses now, and who attribute their good fortune to a change in policy, are perhaps people who would have received TRVs anyway, before any announcement. But, some very weak cases seem to get approved, which also used to happen occasionally in the pre-announcement days. I have noticed a number of posts on the forum since the announcement to the effect of : "We applied post-announcement and were still denied. What gives?"

In short, no one here can possibly predict with any accuracy "the likelihood that the TRV will be refused again". I tend to see it remaining as a strong possibility. Of course, I take a bit of a cynical view, since my wife was thrice denied a TRV, the last refusal coming about 2 months before the announcement.

As for when to apply again, from what I have read here (and with which I agree), is that you should apply first for PR and await AOR before seeking a TRV. Them at least, the IRCC will see you as a serious sponsorship/PR applicant.

 

[Kaibigan]

I did apply First for the PR and after disapproved outland SOWP I travelled to Canada and did the SOWP Inland application. My husband is canadian so he already is in Canada. My Inland SOWP was approved just a few days ago. So for me it was best doing it like that. Now we of course still need to wait for the PR.

Forgive me, but I am struggling to see how your situation and post have much relevance to @logically's situation.

 

[logically]

There seems to be some anecdotal evidence of TRVs having a higher approval rate since the big "announcement". But the minister in charge (Sean Fraser) is no longer minister and I don't know if his successor has echoed the announcement.

I hae not followed too closely, but my impression is that those getting TRVs for spouses now, and who attribute their good fortune to a change in policy, are perhaps people who would have received TRVs anyway, before any announcement. But, some very weak cases seem to get approved, which also used to happen occasionally in the pre-announcement days. I have noticed a number of posts on the forum since the announcement to the effect of : "We applied post-announcement and were still denied. What gives?"

In short, no one here can possibly predict with any accuracy "the likelihood that the TRV will be refused again". I tend to see it remaining as a strong possibility. Of course, I take a bit of a cynical view, since my wife was thrice denied a TRV, the last refusal coming about 2 months before the announcement.

As for when to apply again, from what I have read here (and with which I agree), is that you should apply first for PR and await AOR before seeking a TRV. Them at least, the IRCC will see you as a serious sponsorship/PR applicant.

Getting the visitor visa approved based on the PR application definitely seems like a crystal ball situation. I do wonder if they are a bit more lenient on the TRV app, once the PR app is in.

 

[Kaibigan]

Getting the visitor visa approved based on the PR application definitely seems like a crystal ball situation. I do wonder if they are a bit more lenient on the TRV app, once the PR app is in.

That kinda' captures it. A bit of crystal ball gazing is involved. Some VOs will be lenient, as was always the case, but probably moreso since the announcement.

If you spend much time reading here, I think you will see a clear majority view that the course of prudence is to put the PR application in first and, even then, await AOR. Given your history of 2 failed TRV applications, I would probably be even more inclined to go that route. Of course, the downside is that it probably delays your TRV application by several months, recognizing the time required to cobble together and submit the PR application and the time it takes before AOR comes along.

An overall impression, too, is that processing times for PR applications have come down. When we applied in Nov./22, I recall posted processing time for all countries was about 20 months. Now, some from my wife's country seem to get through the gate in 6 months, in which case there's maybe not a whole lot of benefit in applying for TRV post-AOR, since PR approval might be on the horizon anyway.

 

[logically]

That kinda' captures it. A bit of crystal ball gazing is involved. Some VOs will be lenient, as was always the case, but probably moreso since the announcement.

If you spend much time reading here, I think you will see a clear majority view that the course of prudence is to put the PR application in first and, even then, await AOR. Given your history of 2 failed TRV applications, I would probably be even more inclined to go that route. Of course, the downside is that it probably delays your TRV application by several months, recognizing the time required to cobble together and submit the PR application and the time it takes before AOR comes along.

An overall impression, too, is that processing times for PR applications have come down. When we applied in Nov./22, I recall posted processing time for all countries was about 20 months. Now, some from my wife's country seem to get through the gate in 6 months, in which case there's maybe not a whole lot of benefit in applying for TRV post-AOR, since PR approval might be on the horizon anyway.

That makes sense. Thank you for the reply. Just curious if you did the PR app yourself, or hired someone

 

[Kaibigan]

That makes sense. Thank you for the reply. Just curious if you did the PR app yourself, or hired someone

Did the PR app myself. If fact, my wife's sister married a Canadian at same time as we married. I got elected as rep to do theirs as well. Theirs got approved about a month ahead of ours (10 months). I used to practice law in BC and, being a lawyer, I am deemed to have expertise in all areas of the law . Well, immigration law is not included in my case. A complete neophyte. But, I was able to drag our applications across the finish line with some measure of help from the learned members of this forum. Some of the old hands here have much knowledge and give unstintingly of their time.

 

[logically]

Did the PR app myself. If fact, my wife's sister married a Canadian at same time as we married. I got elected as rep to do theirs as well. Theirs got approved about a month ahead of ours (10 months). I used to practice law in BC and, being a lawyer, I am deemed to have expertise in all areas of the law . Well, immigration law is not included in my case. A complete neophyte. But, I was able to drag our applications across the finish line with some measure of help from the learned members of this forum. Some of the old hands here have much knowledge and give unstintingly of their time.

Ah well being a lawyer definitely helps! I have no background in law, but think it might be straightforward following checklists and guides published by IRCC

 

[Kaibigan]

Ah well being a lawyer definitely helps! I have no background in law, but think it might be straightforward following checklists and guides published by IRCC

Law background is a bit of an asset in these things, but you are right. It's fairly straightforward and, as well, this forum is a resource.

The task is not really all that complicated, but pulling together all the needed information takes time and can be tedious and requires you to keep an eye on the checklists and instructions. Much of the work falls to you even if a lawyer or rep is engaged. You have to come up with all the documents, photos, answers to the many questions asked by the forms. A lawyer has to rely on what you give them.

I suppose lawyers who do this stuff all the time can approach it more efficiently and can direct you and ways that perhaps save time. But they don't work cheap and you can save quite a bit by taking the time to do it all yourself. No doubt, some cases are beset by complexities where perhaps a lawyer can make a real difference. But for the majority, except those easily overwhelmed by paperwork, it's manageable without hiring a professional.

 

[armoured]

Much of the work falls to you even if a lawyer or rep is engaged. You have to come up with all the documents, photos, answers to the many questions asked by the forms. ...

I supposed lawyers who do this stuff all the time can approach it more efficiently and can direct you and ways that perhaps save time. But they don't work cheap and you can save quite a bit by taking the time to do it all yourself.

When I looked into it, this was very much the case - a fair amount of money and I'd still do most of the work - and as you note, ultimately bear the responsibility.

I actually inquired through some lawyer friends, and that led to another friend who does immigration stuff in a law office (I think as a paralegal). I basically kind of assumed they had some software or something to not have to re-enter the same information over and over (which drives me batty and for which I have zero patience).

Short form: I don't think there's any software. They just have a bunch of lower-paid assistants - who might be paralegals but more likely are just low-paid typists (whose work is then checked by paralegals). And of course the firms tack a large margin and overhead on this.

Ultimately most of the work is something a moderately smart, diligent and organized office assistant can do.

But for the majority, except those easily overwhelmed by paperwork, it's manageable without hiring a professional.

Yep - except, of course, for those who have actual difficult questions, and for which a couple consultations would probably be enough to clarify the issues.

Perhaps the additional market of people who just have a lot of money and don't want to bother.

 

[Kaibigan]

When I looked into it, this was very much the case - a fair amount of money and I'd still do most of the work - and as you note, ultimately bear the responsibility.
...

Short form: I don't think there's any software. They just have a bunch of lower-paid assistants - who might be paralegals but more likely are just low-paid typists (whose work is then checked by paralegals). And of course the firms tack a large margin and overhead on this.

Perhaps the additional market of people who just have a lot of money and don't want to bother.

You are absolutely right. I am sure the lawyers on these files do very little of the hands-on work themselves. They'll address any difficulties that might come up, and sign off on the file, but they are not sitting there filling in all the forms and annexing the attachments.

That raises another issue. The mechanics, if you will, of actually completing the forms, dealing with attachments and file size restrictions, etc. I use Apple computers (laptop and desktop) and programs. I get the impression that the IRCC applications are user-friendliest for Windows users. I encountered a fair amount of frustration in getting forms to open, fill, attach, etc. Apple equipment does not seem to do the best with pdf and some formats required by IRCC. I can convert to other formats, as required, at least most of the time. But I did find myself cursing at my screen more than once; including the odd time when I simply had to do a form over. I suppose being the camp of "having a lot of money and don't want to bother" has its attraction. Just hand a box of documents over to a lawyer and leave it at that.

 

[armoured]

I use Apple computers (laptop and desktop) and programs. I get the impression that the IRCC applications are user-friendliest for Windows users. I encountered a fair amount of frustration and getting forms to open, fill, attach, etc. Apple equipment does not seem to do the best with pdf and some formats required by IRCC.

I'm also on apple and having to use the Adobe software is a PItA. But apart from that - which was annoying but not much more than that - it was perfectly fine. Caveat that this was before the fully-online and I suspect now it matters even less (they all suck due to IRCC's bad websites).

I'd only say though that this is NOT because apple does less well with PDF - in almost every respect Apple uses pdf 'natively', just that IRCC is dependent upon Adobe and Adobe likes to do weird proprietary stuff, whereas Apple in this area adheres to the published, open standards. (And because apple users have typically zero need for extra pdf solutions, adobe doesn't make their software a high priorty on apple computers.

This can be seen fairly easy by one thing: I've been basically an apple-primarily person for more years than I care to admit, and I've never had to resort to the adobe acrobat software for ANYTHING else except IRCC. To be fair my previous corporate employer had all-windows and I might not have noticed if anything required adobe, because acrobat was installed all over.