TRV application

[carrot9926]

Hello everyone,

My wife applied for a TRV from the Netherlands on November 29, 2023 and it has been radio silence since. The processing time that day was around 1-1.5 years. We have our wedding celebration in August 2024 and are afraid she won't have a TRV by then.

We submitted her family class sponsorship mid-April 2024. Would it be safer to:
(1) cancel the November 29 TRV application and create a new one for supposedly faster processing times or
(2) send the spousal sponsorship application number from the AOR via webform to the TRV application and hope for the best?

 

[Kaibigan]

Hello everyone,

My wife applied for a TRV from the Netherlands on November 29, 2023 and it has been radio silence since. The processing time that day was around 1-1.5 years. We have our wedding celebration in August 2024 and are afraid she won't have a TRV by then.

We submitted her family class sponsorship mid-April 2024. Would it be safer to:
(1) cancel the November 29 TRV application and create a new one for supposedly faster processing times or
(2) send the spousal sponsorship application number from the AOR via webform to the TRV application and hope for the best?

Maybe just me, but some of what you say is a bit confusing.

I am not sure how withdrawing a Nov./23 TRV application and getting in line with a new one, about 6 months later, will speed things up. Can you set out the rationale for that?

It sounds like you are a Canadian citizen or PR and you submitted a sponsorship/PR application this month. But, you won't be married until August. If you submitted now, one what basis? Common law?

Do you have AOR already for a sponsorship/PR application submitted this month? If so, that was quick service. I am one of those sceptics who believes that having a sponsorship/PR application in the works does not make all that much difference to TRV application. However, I acknowledge some post here where it seems to have worked some kind of magic.

 

[carrot9926]

Sorry for the confusion. The rationale behind is from last year's announcement.

Yes, I am a Canadian citizen. We are legally married since early November 2023. The wedding ceremony in August is the event with family and friends from both sides.

I received the AOR a few days after submitting the application.

 

[armoured]

Sorry for the confusion. The rationale behind is from last year's announcement.

Yes, I am a Canadian citizen. We are legally married since early November 2023. The wedding ceremony in August is the event with family and friends from both sides.

I received the AOR a few days after submitting the application.

That clarification helped.

I think you could try either approach you mentioned in your first email. Since the first one won't cost money/reqire cancelling (unknown timeline) and starting a new file, I'd try that first.

Me, I'd try that and then 15-30 days later inquire through MP's office.

 

[Kaibigan]

Sorry for the confusion. The rationale behind is from last year's announcement.

Yes, I am a Canadian citizen. We are legally married since early November 2023. The wedding ceremony in August is the event with family and friends from both sides.

I received the AOR a few days after submitting the application.

Thanks for that.

I recognized that you would be relying on the spring 2023 "announcement". It was made by Sean Fraser, who is no longer Minister of Immigration and there is no clear evidence that the IRCC has since employed a new set of processing standards for TRVs for permanent resident applicants. The IRCC does not seem to have promulgated any new policies in the wake of the announcement.

There are some PR applicants who have applied for TRVs since the announcement who have received TRVs and have inferred the announcement is what cleared the path. I suspect that to be the case and some Visa Officers have applied what they perceive to be a new policy. However, my view remains that what is really happening, is that many receiving TRVs are those who would have qualified anyway. Those are people who presented applications showing adequate funds, employment, travel history, strong ties to home country, etc.

I am reinforced in my view by what I have seen on this forum since the announcement. I have read a great many posts by those who applied for TRVs, relying on the announcement and have been denied. Many of those have expressed a feeling of having been betrayed by an announcement that carried false hope. All said, no reason not to apply, but don't expect a guaranteed TRV.

I harken back to my expression of surprise at receipt of AOR, apparently within days of your PR application. For a long time, AOR typically came after 8-10 weeks, as it did in our case. If the pace you have witnessed continues, you might see your sponsorship/PR application approved long before your TRV application will be decided.

 

[carrot9926]

Thank you all for the input! We'll try the webform and hope for the best.

 

[armoured]

There are some PR applicants who have applied for TRVs since the announcement who have received TRVs and have inferred the announcement is what cleared the path. I suspect that to be the case and some Visa Officers have applied what they perceive to be a new policy. However, my view remains that what is really happening, is that many receiving TRVs are those who would have qualified anyway. Those are people who presented applications showing adequate funds, employment, travel history, strong ties to home country, etc.

I am reinforced in my view by what I have seen on this forum since the announcement. I have read a great many posts by those who applied for TRVs, relying on the announcement and have been denied. Many of those have expressed a feeling of having been betrayed by an announcement that carried false hope. All said, no reason not to apply, but don't expect a guaranteed TRV.

My own guess on this is three-fold:
-not many post about 'I got trv' when that was (as a result of the announcement) their base expectation;
-to some degree, there are now more people applying than would have done before the announcement, such that if (even if) they are approving more, the percentage shift of approved is not as evident;
and,
-there are some clear / more clear / even stark case types (be it by nationality or other characteristic) that remain, effectively (and possibly even more so than before) 'victims of the algorithm' - for all intents and purposes, unlikely to be approved - no better and possibly worse off than before, or at least comparatively.

But I think the biggest factor is mostly disappointment that it didn't simply jump to close to 100% approval, which was never realistic. (Although I've no doubt it didn't go as high as Minister Fraser had targetted).

Just IMO of course.

 

[Kaibigan]

My own guess on this is three-fold:
...

But I think the biggest factor is mostly disappointment that it didn't simply jump to close to 100% approval, which was never realistic. (Although I've no doubt it didn't go as high as Minister Fraser had targetted).

Just IMO of course.

Your 3-fold guess has merit. Your last comment is certainly accurate.

There was a lot of euphoria at the time of the announcement stemming from the belief there would be a sea change in policy and that unprecedented high volumes of TRVs for spousal PR applicants would be approved and even fast-tracked. Some of us took more of a "Well, let's wait and see" attitude and wholesale approval of TRVs - or anything close to it - never materialized.

 

[armoured]

Some of us took more of a "Well, let's wait and see" attitude and wholesale approval of TRVs - or anything close to it - never materialized.

Yes, I never expected wholesale approvals or a generalized policy. My guess is that it did go up (allowing for some corrections to make them like for like) but I wouldn't hazard a guess how much in practice.