November 2018 AOR - Join here

[Awaismoneeb]

A11.2 is a reference to a part of the immigration law. This section of the immigration law lists out all the conditions required for eligibility i.e. min workex required, min amount of funds required etc

Does this means everything is done and I am gonna hear good news soon ?

Thanks,

 

[legalfalcon]

What does A11.2 met means ?any idea.

A11.2 refers to the section of the Immigration and Regugee Protection Act, includes a new authority that supports the Express Entry system.

11.2 (1) An officer may not issue a visa or other document in respect of an application for permanent residence to a foreign national who was issued an invitation under Division 0.1 to make that application if — at the time the invitation was issued or at the time the officer received their application — the foreign national did not meet the criteria set out in an instruction given under paragraph 10.3(1)(e) or did not have the qualifications on the basis of which they were ranked under an instruction given under paragraph 10.3(1)(h) and were issued the invitation.

Simply put, under section A11.2, an officer may not issue a visa to an applicant who did not or does not meet the Express Entry minimum entry criteria (MEC) or did not or does not possess the qualifications for which they received their CRS score at the time when

• the invitation to apply (ITA) was issued; or
• the e-APR was received by IRCC.

A11.2 refers to the eligibility. To read on the different stages of an EE, see https://goo.gl/AmdtgR

 

[Canadavisa92]

You are not supposed to copy or refer the rules and responsibilities from NOC page when writing roles and responsibilities. The manager or HR person is supposed to write in their own words what exactly you have done and then the reference letter is to be matched with a NOC code that has the roles & responsibilities closest to what is written on your reference letter.

But I guess nothing can be done and lets hope the visa officer ignores this LOE.

No actually what i meant is the content guidelines in general like the title, duration of work, roles etc..

 

[Shahanastar]

No actually what i meant is the content guidelines in general like the title, duration of work, roles etc..

As @pizzaboy99 said, nothing can be done now. You cannot raise another LOE explaining what you explained in LOE.

What’s your AOR?

 

[Canadavisa92]

As @pizzaboy99 said, nothing can be done now. You cannot raise another LOE explaining what you explained in LOE.

What’s your AOR?

Hey my AOR is 17th of Feb.
When i mentioned that statement i meant like he made sure to include all the content required by thr IRCC. As in all the information required i didnt specifically say the roles and duties were like that because my manager actually wrote the whole letter not only the duties part

 

[SithLord]

Hey my AOR is 17th of Feb.
When i mentioned that statement i meant like he made sure to include all the content required by thr IRCC. As in all the information required i didnt specifically say the roles and duties were like that because my manager actually wrote the whole letter not only the duties part

Brother just leave it like I said. Don't keep raising more explanations for your previous explanation. It is going to turn your application into a mess. Your complicating it unnecessarily.

What's done is done!! Just hope for the best now.

 

[ikilledcupidxo]

You are not supposed to copy or refer the rules and responsibilities from NOC page when writing roles and responsibilities. The manager or HR person is supposed to write in their own words what exactly you have done and then the reference letter is to be matched with a NOC code that has the roles & responsibilities closest to what is written on your reference letter.

But I guess nothing can be done and lets hope the visa officer ignores this LOE.

@Canadavisa92

Not necessarily true. I'm in HR and have written several employment letters for my employees - that they have used for their PR. All of them were approved. IRCC finds it easy if you take key words listed on the CIC website and write down the roles and responsibilities.

Employment letters have to be:
Transcribed in English (If provided in another language) and must be on a company letterhead: with job title, start date, end date (or if currently employed), roles & responsibilities, NOC code, FT/PT (with number of hours per week, if possible), and contact info for the signing authority. Lastly, it has to be signed and dated by the issuer. If all this is there, you're golden.

 

[SithLord]

Not necessarily true. I'm in HR and have written several employment letters for my employees - that they have used for their PR. All of them were approved. IRCC finds it easy if you take key words listed on the CIC website and write down the roles and responsibilities.

Employment letters have to be:
Transcribed in English (If provided in another language) and must be on a company letterhead: with job title, start date, end date (or if currently employed), roles & responsibilities, NOC code, FT/PT (with number of hours per week, if possible), and contact info for the signing authority. Lastly, it has to be signed and dated by the issuer. If all this is there, you're golden.

You are right!! My HR also listed down the roles & responsibilities from the CIC website for my noc. He didn't write it word for word but mentioned my actual roles in the company by matching it with specific keywords from the website.

He also provided all the required details as asked by the website on the letter head. As per my GCMS notes, my experience letter looks good and didn't find anything wrong yet

 

[Canadavisa92]

@Canadavisa92

Not necessarily true. I'm in HR and have written several employment letters for my employees - that they have used for their PR. All of them were approved. IRCC finds it easy if you take key words listed on the CIC website and write down the roles and responsibilities.

Employment letters have to be:
Transcribed in English (If provided in another language) and must be on a company letterhead: with job title, start date, end date (or if currently employed), roles & responsibilities, NOC code, FT/PT (with number of hours per week, if possible), and contact info for the signing authority. Lastly, it has to be signed and dated by the issuer. If all this is there, you're golden.

Thank you for your reply, its just the overwhelming feeling of misunderstanding the statement "tried to follow the guidlines with regards to the content required by IRCC" that is worrying me

 

[Canadavisa92]

@Canadavisa92

Not necessarily true. I'm in HR and have written several employment letters for my employees - that they have used for their PR. All of them were approved. IRCC finds it easy if you take key words listed on the CIC website and write down the roles and responsibilities.

Employment letters have to be:
Transcribed in English (If provided in another language) and must be on a company letterhead: with job title, start date, end date (or if currently employed), roles & responsibilities, NOC code, FT/PT (with number of hours per week, if possible), and contact info for the signing authority. Lastly, it has to be signed and dated by the issuer. If all this is there, you're golden.

And yes all this information is available except the salary which was backed up by slips.

 

[ikilledcupidxo]

Thank you for your reply, its just the overwhelming feeling of misunderstanding the statement "tried to follow the guidlines with regards to the content required by IRCC" that is worrying me

I understand. But I agree with @SithLord. You are only creating a delay by trying to provide more explanation for this. Over-explaining can sometimes make them think that you're trying to justify or hide something. Best leave it at that for now, and hope for the best. All the best

 

[Canadavisa92]

I understand. But I agree with @SithLord. You are only creating a delay by trying to provide more explanation for this. Over-explaining can sometimes make them think that you're trying to justify or hide something. Best leave it at that for now, and hope for the best. All the best

I didnt I have just mentioned that in the loe part where i explained the absence of the salary details. I am not planning on submitting another cse or anything

 

[imspabhcan]

Hello all. Just got off a call with an agent. Seems like the wait will get a bit longer. So my app went to eligibility met way back in dec 18. And security and criminality are yet to start. The agent also said that should my profile not get processed by May 2, I should not call/email them before June 11. AOR - Nov 2, 2018. @pizzaboy99 @SithLord @legalfalcon @kattarrina and other senior members of the process - kindly advise. Many thanks for your help!

 

[ikilledcupidxo]

I didnt I have just mentioned that in the loe part where i explained the absence of the salary details. I am not planning on submitting another cse or anything

That is fine if its not included since you have attached your pay statements anyway. You're good to go

 

[pizzaboy99]

So Met would imply that another officer doesn't require to go through eligibility again while Recommend Pass does? As in Met is one step more closer to being 'passed' than 'Recommend Pass'.

Met > Recommend Pass ?

Met basically means your eligibility process is over.