+1(514) 937-9445 or Toll-free (Canada & US) +1 (888) 947-9445

Parents and Grandparents Sponsorship 2018

nayr69sg

Champion Member
Apr 13, 2017
1,571
679
No, absolutely 0% chance this will happen. Submitting ineligible or duplicate entries is not illegal nor punishable by fines. Those that were ineligible but still entered lottery and get chosen will simply not submit an app, or will submit an app and have it rejected. That is all.

IRCC may do a 2nd lottery later this year if less than 10K qualified apps received for first round, but this is not known yet.
They should tweak the system better to reduce waste of time and man hours (cost).
 

Rob_TO

VIP Member
Nov 7, 2012
11,427
1,551
Toronto
Category........
FAM
Visa Office......
Seoul, Korea
App. Filed.......
13-07-2012
AOR Received.
18-08-2012
File Transfer...
21-08-2012
Med's Done....
Sent with App
Passport Req..
N/R - Exempt
VISA ISSUED...
30-10-2012
LANDED..........
16-11-2012
They should tweak the system better to reduce waste of time and man hours (cost).
There is not much they can do to actually check income or eligibility, since 2017 tax returns won't be even started until long after the lottery has closed.

IMO, what they should do is charge a minimal non-refundable fee (like $25) to even enter the lottery. This will cause people to seriously check they meet requirements before entering, and will stop people from entering just to try and mess up the system (which I'm sure people do).
 
  • Like
Reactions: YVR123 and kcward7

Buletruck

VIP Member
May 18, 2015
6,878
2,711
I hope they walk the talk and prosecute those who won the lottery and made false declarations that they met the income requirements.

And write a big story about it in the news. Send a serious message out.

Might be a good way for the Liberals to generate some income through fines.
You can't really hold the government responsible for people's inability to read basic instructions. I mean really, they can't even take the time to go through the posts on here to get a clue! 70% of the questions posted here have been answered at least once.......Just lazy IMO! How many have asked:
  1. Do I need income for the last 3 years
  2. My income is not enough for 1 year , can I still apply
  3. How many people in my family
  4. etc, etc.....
And in 3 years they'll be bitching because there application got refused for not meeting LICO, etc......

Kudo's to those who have the patience to keep answering the same questions over and over again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: YVR123

nayr69sg

Champion Member
Apr 13, 2017
1,571
679
You can't really hold the government responsible for people's inability to read basic instructions. I mean really, they can't even take the time to go through the posts on here to get a clue! 70% of the questions posted here have been answered at least once.......Just lazy IMO! How many have asked:
  1. Do I need income for the last 3 years
  2. My income is not enough for 1 year , can I still apply
  3. How many people in my family
  4. etc, etc.....
And in 3 years they'll be bitching because there application got refused for not meeting LICO, etc......

Kudo's to those who have the patience to keep answering the same questions over and over again.
The government is not responsible for people's laziness and incompetence. The people should take responsibility. There shouldnt be free lunches.

So have the interest to apply form have sections where the applicant has to DECLARE that they meet the requirements. Also add a clause that says that making false declaration is a serious offence and may lead to prosecution and fine.

Perhaps one way is to have an application fee as ROB_TO suggested (paid by credit card) and if one makes a false declaration, there will be a fine charged to the credit card.

I am sure CIC is just as frustrated answering the same questions. It is their job of course. It is the onus of applicants to read the instructions and understand the requirements before putting in an application.

If I make a declaration that I have income X to CRA and then it turns out that it is false, does CRA say Oh we cannot hold you accountable for not understanding and making a false declaration so we are not going to apply interest to how much you owe us in taxes.

Seriously. Get firm on this. Remember that CIC has not revealed whether they actually met the 10,000 quota for 2017. Stop throwing smoke and mirrors.
 
Last edited:

nayr69sg

Champion Member
Apr 13, 2017
1,571
679
My personal view is that the Canadian government should encourage people who are able to take care of their parents and not burden society. People who are able to take care of their parents and not burden the system SHOULD BE ABLE to read instructions properly and make the necessary arrangements to have their applications delivered to the CIC office for processing.

So there was nothing wrong with the old system.

With the new system, it is all a show. Seriously, do you think with people who are too lazy to read instructions and forums that they are MORE likely to be able to look after their parents properly and not burden the system? More likely these would be the ones who will ask questions after questions and repeat the same when having to care for their parents.

Liberals talk about how they want "FAIRNESS".

Well is there anything FAIR about LICO then?

if you really just insist "oh we want family reunification to be a dream" then do away with income requirements. Why link to the ability to pay right?

But that was the criticism of the old system right?

Those who met income requirements could NOT afford to get a courier to deliver their documents to Sydney NS? Seriously? Get real Liberals! This is all political pandering.
 

BlueBasket

Member
Sep 28, 2017
12
1
Quick question

Me+Wife
Will sponsor my
Dad+Mom+My17yoSister

so the # of Family is 5? or 4?

In the Interest To Sponsor Web Form

I can only add my parent's details.

TIA. :)
 

canadalikes

Newbie
Jan 9, 2018
4
0
Thanks. The link says, if no last name, enter all of the first name into the last name and leave first name blank.

but i mistake broken the first name "Innaa Ivanov" into "First name: Innaa" and "Last name: Ivanov".

Please let me know if any issue will i face

thanks you. my little brother 18 year old...

i did not add his name in the intent to submitt..

is that okay.. i only entered parenst name.. no child .. will it be okay
 

Rob_TO

VIP Member
Nov 7, 2012
11,427
1,551
Toronto
Category........
FAM
Visa Office......
Seoul, Korea
App. Filed.......
13-07-2012
AOR Received.
18-08-2012
File Transfer...
21-08-2012
Med's Done....
Sent with App
Passport Req..
N/R - Exempt
VISA ISSUED...
30-10-2012
LANDED..........
16-11-2012
So have the interest to apply form have sections where the applicant has to DECLARE that they meet the requirements. Also add a clause that says that making false declaration is a serious offence and may lead to prosecution and fine.

Perhaps one way is to have an application fee as ROB_TO suggested (paid by credit card) and if one makes a false declaration, there will be a fine charged to the credit card.
IRCC does not have the resources to verify incomes/family sizes of every single person who entered the lottery, plus their co-signers. They will only verify incomes of those that actually submit an application.

However simply charging a fee to enter the lottery, will on it's own cut down on ineligible lottery entries significantly since people take a much higher interest in something when it costs them money.

So there was nothing wrong with the old system.
There was tons wrong with the old courier system. As demand in program grew each year, the quota would have filled up within hours on the first day. So it would still be a lottery in terms of what courier company you happened to choose. Plus courier fees would continue to rise to guarantee people they would have their app first in line. I could easily see courier companies charging thousands to line up at IRCC office days in advance.

Lottery is, by far, the fairest possible way to run the parents program which is really a purely H&C program anyways and the lowest priority of all immigration streams right now.
 

nayr69sg

Champion Member
Apr 13, 2017
1,571
679
IRCC does not have the resources to verify incomes/family sizes of every single person who entered the lottery, plus their co-signers. They will only verify incomes of those that actually submit an application.

However simply charging a fee to enter the lottery, will on it's own cut down on ineligible lottery entries significantly since people take a much higher interest in something when it costs them money.



There was tons wrong with the old courier system. As demand in program grew each year, the quota would have filled up within hours on the first day. So it would still be a lottery in terms of what courier company you happened to choose. Plus courier fees would continue to rise to guarantee people they would have their app first in line. I could easily see courier companies charging thousands to line up at IRCC office days in advance.

Lottery is, by far, the fairest possible way to run the parents program which is really a purely H&C program anyways and the lowest priority of all immigration streams right now.
Well we have yet to hear if CIC has met their quota of 10,000 with the new system. At least with the old system they did meet the quota.

Look it is our parents that we want to join us in Canada. Thousands? I'd pay it. Won't you?

I do agree with you that charging a fee to enter the lottery eg $25 would be a good start. I mean seriously, if you complain about paying $25 to enter the lottery, then you probably don't have the means to support your parents in Canada.

If $25 doesn't weed out enough ineligible applications then increase it to $50 the next year, then $75 then $100 till you get the desired results.
 

Buletruck

VIP Member
May 18, 2015
6,878
2,711
Well we have yet to hear if CIC has met their quota of 10,000 with the new system.
Quota is for a maximum. If they didn't meet the 10,000 quota, it really doesn't matter to them....there is no minimum number of applications they want to process (given the general populations sentiment on PGP, the fewer the better).
 

nayr69sg

Champion Member
Apr 13, 2017
1,571
679
Quota is for a maximum. If they didn't meet the 10,000 quota, it really doesn't matter to them....there is no minimum number of applications they want to process (given the general populations sentiment on PGP, the fewer the better).
The general population's sentiment on PGP is based on the perception that this class is a drain on the system. So why not select based on the ability of the family to support their parents? ie income and specifically how much taxes they pay. I say raise the LICO standards x 2. It would appease the general population.
 
Last edited:

Buletruck

VIP Member
May 18, 2015
6,878
2,711
So why not select based on the ability of the family to support their parents? ie income and specifically how much taxes they pay. I say raise the LICO standards x 2.
Because once they are in Canada, they have every right to utilize the health care system, regardless of the sponsors income. Aged populations put a bigger strain on that system, and increase costs, while, for the most part, those sponsored for PGP don't generate any additional tax revenue.

So why not select based on the ability of the family to support their parents?
Because that would end up in the courts so fast, IRCC wouldn't even have a chance to implement it. It has to be reasonably fair to all applicant. People already grip about having to meet LICO, never mind 3 years worth. IMO, IRCC would probably love to do that (given PGP isn't a priority), but it would likely be an unwinnable case in the courts and potential political suicide for the party that brings it in with the immigrant voting population.
 

Pearl1

Hero Member
Mar 9, 2014
955
87
Job Offer........
Pre-Assessed..
You can't really hold the government responsible for people's inability to read basic instructions. I mean really, they can't even take the time to go through the posts on here to get a clue! 70% of the questions posted here have been answered at least once.......Just lazy IMO! How many have asked:
  1. Do I need income for the last 3 years
  2. My income is not enough for 1 year , can I still apply
  3. How many people in my family
  4. etc, etc.....
And in 3 years they'll be bitching because there application got refused for not meeting LICO, etc......

Kudo's to those who have the patience to keep answering the same questions over and over again.
LOL ... :D
 

nayr69sg

Champion Member
Apr 13, 2017
1,571
679
Because that would end up in the courts so fast, IRCC wouldn't even have a chance to implement it. It has to be reasonably fair to all applicant. People already grip about having to meet LICO, never mind 3 years worth. IMO, IRCC would probably love to do that (given PGP isn't a priority), but it would likely be an unwinnable case in the courts and potential political suicide for the party that brings it in with the immigrant voting population.
Having LICO is already such a system. Much less saying IRCC would not have a chance implementing it.

So is everything done based on winning votes among the electorate? What a cynical view of the government. But I agree that is the reality unforunately.

Perhaps us immigrant populations need to go out and make our voices heard more. Go on street demonstrations etc. Just like the pride parades etc.
 

Pearl1

Hero Member
Mar 9, 2014
955
87
Job Offer........
Pre-Assessed..
Well we have yet to hear if CIC has met their quota of 10,000 with the new system. At least with the old system they did meet the quota.

Look it is our parents that we want to join us in Canada. Thousands? I'd pay it. Won't you?

I do agree with you that charging a fee to enter the lottery eg $25 would be a good start. I mean seriously, if you complain about paying $25 to enter the lottery, then you probably don't have the means to support your parents in Canada.

If $25 doesn't weed out enough ineligible applications then increase it to $50 the next year, then $75 then $100 till you get the desired results.

Do you know that 95000 people entered lottery last year ? Multiply it by 25 and check the amount you get :O

Government has a system.

Although I agree that if they can get their processing better, there is no harm in charging this amount. However, it is society's responsibility as well - cooperate with the system to get better results. Abusing the system, will make it more complex with every passing day.

And don't forget, there is SUPERVISA already in place for those who want to unite with their parents. If one has means to support parents in Canada, then pay some extra for their health insurance as well. I'm sure it would not be a burden either.
 
Last edited: