Traveling While Waiting for Spousal Sponsorship

[Ponga]

For the record, when we moved here we interacted with a border agent who cut us off right after we said "we decided to move to Canada" and gave us a very long and unpleasant lecture about how people don't get to just get to show up at the border and "decide to move to Canada". Once she realized that we literally had a ream of paper showing our serious intent, and that we had thoroughly done our research into the spousal sponsorship process, the tone changed, but I was literally shaking in my boots... especially since we had rented our home and had all our belongs and a dog with. Thought for a moment we'd be heading to live with an aunt or something.

So! Yeah, they're likely let us back in but... if they're having a bad day... you're going to sweat. Fun times.

So you actually arrived at the PoE with all your `stuff'?! Yup...that was a bad idea. Glad it worked out for you!

CBSA officers have an enormous amount of power (as they should) and your story could have had a devastating end. You could have been given an Exclusion Order banning you from returning to Canada for a year. Had it not been for your understanding of what `Dual Intent' is, in the eyes of the officer, your story could be vastly different.

You do NOT need a lawyer to help with the sponsorship. These forums will be very helpful for you!

Good luck!

 

[richardrocks]

So you actually arrived at the PoE with all your `stuff'?! Yup...that was a bad idea. Glad it worked out for you!

CBSA officers have an enormous amount of power (as they should) and your story could have had a devastating end. You could have been given an Exclusion Order banning you from returning to Canada for a year. Had it not been for your understanding of what `Dual Intent' is, in the eyes of the officer, your story could be vastly different.

You do NOT need a lawyer to help with the sponsorship. These forums will be very helpful for you!

Good luck!

So what is the process for a visa exempt American spouse to accompany me to live in Canada pending an inland spousal sponsorship application? He needed to apply for temporary residency ahead of that? Under what temporary residency status/program? I perused the spousal inland sponsorship site thoroughly... what did I miss? Just said he needs to have temporary residency to apply, which they granted at the border that day, thank goodness.

 

[armoured]

What was the right way to do it? I'm a Canadian and there's an inland process for applying for spousal sponsorship and Americans generally don't need visas to enter Canada. Let's educate folks in a similar situation...

We were nothing but pleasant and my husband completely took it in stride. Just smiled and said, Plan B could be a fun adventure. Fortunately, no Plan B needed and we love life in Canada. Only wish there was more transparency online about the process. It's dizzying. Shouldn't need an attorney in a scenario like ours.

It is the 'move' part with all his stuff that's triggering them.

So either do it in advance - outland - or come as a visitor.

Inland process is for visitors who ... then stay temporarily while their case is disposed of. But technically - in IRCC eyes - they've not moved.

Now, how would I do this differently in your case?
-You move, with your stuff. (If your stuff happens to be mixed with his household stuff, probably ok - they don't generally check underwear, and hey, you can wear whatever underwear you like).
-Your spouse comes to visit - either separately with not much stuff or in car with you and declares "I'm just helping her settle in" and then I have to [go water the plants back home or whatever.] Subsequently if he decides to file ('changes his mind') for the PR and/or extends his visitor status, that's ok.
-If he'd arrived on his own with his stuff - higher probability he'd not be let in at all.

Is this a distinction without a difference? Maybe. I'm not trying to defend the way they look at things. But under the current approach, you don't just move. (The fact they let him in after seeing you're going to sponsor right away is basically recognition of this).

Or put more simply: they want people to recognize they don't have a right to move, and can only enter as visitors. Sometimes they're picky about that, sometimes about 'bringing your stuff', whatever - recognition that one status is another.

Some here will claim saying 'dual intent' magically resolves this - dual intent being you can enter as a visitor and still 'intend' to apply to become a PR. Which is a true thing that IRCC has written down, but I think CBSA types hate lawyers and phrases that smell of lawyers, and 'dual intent' smells of lawyering.

Perhaps closer to the truth is stating clearly but simply something like "I will only remain in Canada as long as I'm allowed to by the government and I get the basics of what visitor status is and I'm not allowed to stay forever as a visitor." Or I'll leave when my status runs out. There's no perfect phrase because they'd recognize perfect phrases as not honest - and they're allowed to judge honesty.

 

[armoured]

So you actually arrived at the PoE with all your `stuff'?! Yup...that was a bad idea. Glad it worked out for you!

CBSA officers have an enormous amount of power (as they should) and your story could have had a devastating end. You could have been given an Exclusion Order banning you from returning to Canada for a year.

I doubt they could exclude her, she's a citizen! ))))

To be fair - they don't usually issue such orders for genuine mis- or lack of understanding. At least I've not heard of it.

Worst I've heard of is CBSA turning an unhappy couple back at the border (with their stuff so inconvenient!) and telling them to get their s___ together (or something to that effect).

 

[armoured]

So what is the process for a visa exempt American spouse to accompany me to live in Canada pending an inland spousal sponsorship application?

Answered separately below but shortest form: he arrives as a visitor. Generally showing up with all your stuff is an indication you're not visiting.

 

[richardrocks]

Answered separately below but shortest form: he arrives as a visitor. Generally showing up with all your stuff is an indication you're not visiting.

Fair enough. In my mind, that seems like a stretching of the truth to say the least, which is something I have never done with a border agent. Figured it was best to lay it all out in a one on one conversation with strong evidence of dual intent given the fact that that there's specific spousal sponsorship process for non Canadian spouses who apply from within Canada. Wish there was more of an "official process" other than parsing words a certain way and misrepresenting the goods in my vehicle and so on. In any event, we're here and it's great. And these forums have been fantastic as well.

 

[richardrocks]

Fair enough. In my mind, that seems like a stretching of the truth to say the least, which is something I have never done with a border agent. Figured it was best to lay it all out in a one on one conversation with strong evidence of dual intent given the fact that that there's specific spousal sponsorship process for non Canadian spouses who apply from within Canada. Wish there was more of an "official process" other than parsing words a certain way and misrepresenting the goods in my vehicle and so on. In any event, we're here and it's great. And these forums have been fantastic as well.

https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR-2002-227/page-18.html#h-687616

The law uses the word "cohabit". It just seemed totally reasonable to have an open and honest conversation with a border agent about our intent. I get it, their job is to not admit visitors who intend to overstay. But since there's an actual process for spouses to "cohabit" with their sponsor, it didn't seem that unreasonable to discuss this with an agent. My bad!

A foreign national is a member of the spouse or common-law partner in Canada class if they

• (a) are the spouse or common-law partner of a sponsor and cohabit with that sponsor in Canada;
• (b) have temporary resident status in Canada; and
• (c) are the subject of a sponsorship application.

 

[Ponga]

I doubt they could exclude her, she's a citizen! ))))

To be fair - they don't usually issue such orders for genuine mis- or lack of understanding. At least I've not heard of it.

Worst I've heard of is CBSA turning an unhappy couple back at the border (with their stuff so inconvenient!) and telling them to get their s___ together (or something to that effect).

That was intended for her non-citizen spouse, even though I used `you' in place of `your spouse'. LOL!

 

[Ponga]

https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR-2002-227/page-18.html#h-687616

The law uses the word "cohabit". It just seemed totally reasonable to have an open and honest conversation with a border agent about our intent. I get it, their job is to not admit visitors who intend to overstay. But since there's an actual process for spouses to "cohabit" with their sponsor, it didn't seem that unreasonable to discuss this with an agent. My bad!

A foreign national is a member of the spouse or common-law partner in Canada class if they

• (a) are the spouse or common-law partner of a sponsor and cohabit with that sponsor in Canada;
• (b) have temporary resident status in Canada; and
• (c) are the subject of a sponsorship application.

(a) is actually a requirement for a SCPLC (Inland) applicant, not an Outland applicant (which can be submitted from inside Canada).

Submitting an Outland application assures that if, for any reason, the PR applicant is denied re-entry into Canada, their Outland application continues to be processed.
Not true if the applicant submitted the SCPLC application.

 

[richardrocks]

That was intended for her non-citizen spouse, even though I used `you' in place of `your spouse'. LOL!

Yup. As a Canadian I had every right to be at the border with MY stuff (although in most marriages my is really our), but as for husband from a visa exempt country, just wish that there was a way to procure temporary residency as required for the spousal application ahead of Border Day without mischaracterizing anything. Maybe there is, since this is likely what people from visa non exempt countries do?). I would have much preferred to get permission in advance without doing the outland process. Hope others avoid missteps in light of my experience.

Conversely, wish it weren’t touchy to discuss dual intent at the border in light of the inland sponsorship process.

We chose the inland process because we both want to be here together, with medical and OWP. Is OWP offered to Outland applicants?

 

[Lost54729289]

Hello,
I applied for pr sponsorship application inland. My file got returned exactly after 1 month due to missing document. So, I submitted again and now, its been 3 months.. I am not receiving AOR. Is anyone else experienced this or any advice. What should I do.

 

[armoured]

just wish that there was a way to procure temporary residency as required for the spousal application ahead of Border Day without mischaracterizing anything. ... I would have much preferred to get permission in advance without doing the outland process.

There is a way to do this without misrepresenting: either do outland in advance, OR, he comes to visit without his stuff. If asked, says he is here to visit, but considering moving permanently later / filing. If he hasn't filed yet, that's not lying.

Your preferences, ie having it settled with permission in advance without doing outland - well, your preferences are not the point.

As far as I'm concerned, the mistake was stating outright he was arriving to move, not visit.

If you want to say that [he is moving] when you arrive, you apply outland in advance.

In reality: if one makes the slightest effort to genuflect in direction of making clear "this is a visit" and not showing up with all your stuff, usually they'll not make a big deal out of it.

Whether any of this makes perfect sense or is efficient: probably not. All bureaucratic/administrative systems have their own logic.

As the French say, "il ne faut pas chercher à comprendre." Don't try to understand (implied "it is what it is.")

 

[richardrocks]

and sorry OP for stirring up the digression we are all here to learn and help.

 

[Ponga]

Is OWP offered to Outland applicants?

Yes, but it's a moot point for you.

It's amazing how many people do not understand that an Outland application can be submitted from Canada. The onle potential downfall would be that if the applicant is required to appear in-person for an interview at a foreign office.

 

[armoured]

Yes, but it's a moot point for you.

It's amazing how many people do not understand that an Outland application can be submitted from Canada. The onle potential downfall would be that if the applicant is required to appear in-person for an interview at a foreign office.

I think the IRCC online info has mostly been updated (too lazy to check though); problem is that there are zillions of pages out there that are out of date.