APPLICATION RETURNED;Language proof not acceptable

[rafzy]

This is strange. A friend of mine submitted his diploma from France, it was accepted. His native language is not French or English. He got his citizenship already.

I submitted a diploma and transcript in English from my home country. Native language is neither French nor English. I got my AOR . I don’t know if they will ask for more proof later.

The only proof you have to show during the interview is the original diploma that you submitted with your application.

 

[dpenabill]

I submitted a diploma and transcript in English from my home country. Native language is neither French nor English. I got my AOR . I don’t know if they will ask for more proof later.

The only proof you have to show during the interview is the original diploma that you submitted with your application.

Actually, the documentation to show ability in an official language is specifically a requirement for what constitutes a complete application. And that is all it does. Applicants will be screened in person for ability in an official language.

In particular, unless exempt, adult citizenship applicants must demonstrate ability in one of the official languages during the test and interview. No amount of documentation will suffice as proof of ability -- the applicant must satisfy the interviewer, in conversation with the interviewer, he or she is sufficiently competent in English, or French, to meet the requirements.

For the OP, it is difficult to identify what in particular the problem is. But that is about what documents will meet the threshold requirement, sufficient proof for IRCC to process the application for citizenship.

 

[arsal385]

This is bizarre decision. CIC clearly states secondary or post secondary education in the form of certificate, diploma and degree with medium of instruction in English is suffice to fulfill the language requirement.

I submitted Higher Secondary Certificate from Pakistan along with college letter that medium of instruction was English to cover language requirement.

Now after this event, I am worried about the fate of my application which was submitted in the first week of June.

 

[bukeluke]

This is strange. A friend of mine submitted his diploma from France, it was accepted. His native language is not French or English. He got his citizenship already.

I submitted a diploma and transcript in English from my home country. Native language is neither French nor English. I got my AOR . I don’t know if they will ask for more proof later.

It depends on the country of school, not the applicant’s native language. So like you got the degree from US, totally accepted

 

[arsal385]

It depends on the country of school, not the applicant’s native language. So like you got the degree from US, totally accepted

This means CIC should have mentioned in the first place that they only accept education from English speaking countries.

 

[Mexontario]

This is bizarre decision. CIC clearly states secondary or post secondary education in the form of certificate, diploma and degree with medium of instruction in English is suffice to fulfill the language requirement.

I submitted Higher Secondary Certificate from Pakistan along with college letter that medium of instruction was English to cover language requirement.

Now after this event, I am worried about the fate of my application which was submitted in the first week of June.

You could probably know it in a month's time.

 

[nskatcv]

My Application was returned to me because of language evidence is not acceptable for because ita not listed of acceptable evidence.But i submitted my diploma and transcipt of records all in Englist languange and i did put additional evidence coming from my School that the meduim of teaching used is all in English i dont understand why Im so Confused.I DId took IELTS before 2010 but i lost my copy already .Pls help

May I ask what is your current occupation in Canada right now? That may shed some light on the reason behind their decision to reject your diploma as an evidence of English language proficiency. I mean what level of English communication are you handling in your current occupation.

 

[dpenabill]

This is bizarre decision. CIC clearly states secondary or post secondary education in the form of certificate, diploma and degree with medium of instruction in English is suffice to fulfill the language requirement.

Others are more familiar with the specifics in regards to what type of documents IRCC accepts as sufficient proof of language ability to meet its *complete application* standards.

The information IRCC provides is mostly straight-forward. See
https://www.cic.gc.ca/english/helpcentre/answer.asp?qnum=571&top=5
and for details about documentation proving completion of educational program in one of the official languages, see https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/canadian-citizenship/become-canadian-citizen/eligibility/language-proof.html

As I have noted, for the OP it is difficult to identify what in particular the problem is. BUT whatever the problem is, it is fairly likely it has to do with the content or quality of the documents submitted, perhaps some more or less technical detail. After all, just because a piece of paper is titled "Diploma" (or such) does not, in itself, mean a whole lot.

Also note, for example, if there is any language on the document submitted that is in a language other than French or English, the document must be accompanied by a CERTIFIED translation.

And of course like ALL of us in our work, sometimes mistakes are made. Even by our dedicated civil servants working in IRCC. Unfortunately.

Beyond that, no expansive powers of intellect necessary to recognize that documents are likely to be more closely scrutinized if they are from educational institutions in countries where the primary or official language is NOT either French or English. So technical shortcomings in such documents elevate the risk they will not meet IRCC standards for documentation proving language ability.

May I ask what is your current occupation in Canada right now? That may shed some light on the reason behind their decision to reject your diploma as an evidence of English language proficiency. I mean what level of English communication are you handling in your current occupation.

Occupation NOT likely a factor.

The initial screening of applications for "completeness" is largely technical, mostly a checklist, the processing agent mechanically verifying that certain information is included and certain documents are included, and mostly does not involve a substantive assessment of the information. With some exceptions; for example, the applicant's information as to dates of status in Canada is, of course, compared to the GCMS records for that individual to verify that information. And documentation itself is screened to verify its meets IRCC standards.

This is especially true for documentation as to proof of language. Either the document meets IRCC standards or not. (As I noted above, regardless of the documentation submitted with the application, applicants will be screened IN PERSON, during the interview, to verify they meet the language requirements.)

 

[nskatcv]

Occupation NOT likely a factor.

The initial screening of applications for "completeness" is largely technical, mostly a checklist, the processing agent mechanically verifying that certain information is included and certain documents are included, and mostly does not involve a substantive assessment of the information. With some exceptions; for example, the applicant's information as to dates of status in Canada is, of course, compared to the GCMS records for that individual to verify that information. And documentation itself is screened to verify its meets IRCC standards.

This is especially true for documentation as to proof of language. Either the document meets IRCC standards or not. (As I noted above, regardless of the documentation submitted with the application, applicants will be screened IN PERSON, during the interview, to verify they meet the language requirements.)

@dpenabill,

I agree with you in general. But hard to believe they can be that MECHANICAL in their approach. But who knows!

Secondly, let's say the diploma is from a country where English is also one of the official languages, if not the only one, like India. In that case, if someone submits a Diploma that is in English language, doesn't that automatically mean the instruction was in English. I mean why would a Diploma/Degree be printed in English language if the instruction was not in English. I am giving sort of a heuristic argument, but that is what I think.

In our combined application, I have submitted my wife's Diploma only (not even transcript) from India that is printed solely in English. Doesn't mention English as the medium of instruction nor have I submitted a separate letter that mentions this. Reading these kind of posts, I think I should be prepared for an application rejection after a year or so of wait, even though I personally scored 9/9 in IELTS. What a pity it would be!

 

[dpenabill]

@dpenabill,

I agree with you in general. But hard to believe they can be that MECHANICAL in their approach. But who knows!

Secondly, let's say the diploma is from a country where English is also one of the official languages, if not the only one, like India. In that case, if someone submits a Diploma that is in English language, doesn't that automatically mean the instruction was in English. I mean why would a Diploma/Degree be printed in English language if the instruction was not in English. I am giving sort of a heuristic argument, but that is what I think.

In our combined application, I have submitted my wife's Diploma only (not even transcript) from India that is printed solely in English. Doesn't mention English as the medium of instruction nor have I submitted a separate letter that mentions this. Reading these kind of posts, I think I should be prepared for an application rejection after a year or so of wait, even though I personally scored 9/9 in IELTS. What a pity it would be!

For sure MOST of the completeness screening is mechanical. A simple checklist.

It is not at all likely the applicant's employment history is considered in evaluating whether the proof of language meets IRCC's requirements.

Example of how mechanical the completeness screening typically is:

An illustrative example of how mechanical the complete check can be is item 9.c) If the applicant mistakenly checks [yes], based on having been living in the applicant's home country during the five year eligibility period, the application will be returned if the applicant failed to submit CIT 0177 ("Residence Outside of Canada" form), even though it would be clear from the information in the application that the applicant was never a Crown servant and was not claiming any presence credit for time abroad as a Crown servant. This is not much of a problem now, since IRCC amended the application form and clarified that 9.c) is ONLY about living abroad time qualifying for the Crown servant credit. For a long while (more than a year) in previous versions the application only asked if the applicant was living abroad during the eligibility period, no reference to "Crown" servants. Many checked [yes] truthfully but did not include CIT 0177 because it was entirely NOT applicable to them. And their applications were returned. During that period it was OK for applicants to check [No] for this item, even if they had been living abroad during the eligibility period, or to check [Yes] and include CIT 0177 with N/A clearly marked to make it sufficiently clear it was not applicable. ​

As I have noted, others here are better acquainted with the precise details regarding proof of language to be submitted with the application. I entered the discussion to clarify that the documentation as to language ability is what is necessary to make a complete application, and that adult applicants (unless exempt) must also satisfy they meet the language requirement IN-PERSON during the interview (the knowledge of Canada test is also part of the screening for ability in an official language).

There are scores of forum participants who have educational backgrounds in India, so there should be plenty of anecdotal reports about how it goes for them in other topics here. This is not something I have been following. If you are concerned I suggest digging through some of the older pages here to see if this is a problem for applicants with educational backgrounds in India in particular.

If an application is going to be returned as incomplete, that usually happens relatively soon (two to four months) after applying. So it is highly unlikely that there will be a " rejection after a year or so of wait" because the documentation submitted with the application falls short of meeting IRCC's standards for proof of language.

Additionally, if you submitted proof of IELTS as specified (again, I am not engaged in what in detail satisfies IRCC), YOUR application will not be returned for lack of proof of language (at least not absent a mistake). If you made a family application and the application for one of the adults is incomplete, such as that adult's proof of language falls short, your application will be returned as part of the family application package.

 

[nskatcv]

For sure MOST of the completeness screening is mechanical. A simple checklist.

It is not at all likely the applicant's employment history is considered in evaluating whether the proof of language meets IRCC's requirements.

Example of how mechanical the completeness screening typically is:

An illustrative example of how mechanical the complete check can be is item 9.c) If the applicant mistakenly checks [yes], based on having been living in the applicant's home country during the five year eligibility period, the application will be returned if the applicant failed to submit CIT 0177 ("Residence Outside of Canada" form), even though it would be clear from the information in the application that the applicant was never a Crown servant and was not claiming any presence credit for time abroad as a Crown servant. This is not much of a problem now, since IRCC amended the application form and clarified that 9.c) is ONLY about living abroad time qualifying for the Crown servant credit. For a long while (more than a year) in previous versions the application only asked if the applicant was living abroad during the eligibility period, no reference to "Crown" servants. Many checked [yes] truthfully but did not include CIT 0177 because it was entirely NOT applicable to them. And their applications were returned. During that period it was OK for applicants to check [No] for this item, even if they had been living abroad during the eligibility period, or to check [Yes] and include CIT 0177 with N/A clearly marked to make it sufficiently clear it was not applicable. ​

As I have noted, others here are better acquainted with the precise details regarding proof of language to be submitted with the application. I entered the discussion to clarify that the documentation as to language ability is what is necessary to make a complete application, and that adult applicants (unless exempt) must also satisfy they meet the language requirement IN-PERSON during the interview (the knowledge of Canada test is also part of the screening for ability in an official language).

There are scores of forum participants who have educational backgrounds in India, so there should be plenty of anecdotal reports about how it goes for them in other topics here. This is not something I have been following. If you are concerned I suggest digging through some of the older pages here to see if this is a problem for applicants with educational backgrounds in India in particular.

If an application is going to be returned as incomplete, that usually happens relatively soon (two to four months) after applying. So it is highly unlikely that there will be a " rejection after a year or so of wait" because the documentation submitted with the application falls short of meeting IRCC's standards for proof of language.

Additionally, if you submitted proof of IELTS as specified (again, I am not engaged in what in detail satisfies IRCC), YOUR application will not be returned for lack of proof of language (at least not absent a mistake). If you made a family application and the application for one of the adults is incomplete, such as that adult's proof of language falls short, your application will be returned as part of the family application package.

@dpenabill ,

Ok, I concede on the mechanical checking aspect of applications. In that case, the Original Poster @YANDC said that he

Submitted his Graduate Bachelor Degree and the transcript which are both in English language, along with an additional letter explicitly mentioning medium of instruction as English.

What could be incomplete here because the reason given for rejection is the lack of submission of the proof of English language proficiency.

 

[dpenabill]

@dpenabill ,

Ok, I concede on the mechanical checking aspect of applications. In that case, the Original Poster @YANDC said that he

Submitted his Graduate Bachelor Degree and the transcript which are both in English language, along with an additional letter explicitly mentioning medium of instruction as English.

What could be incomplete here because the reason given for rejection is the lack of submission of the proof of English language proficiency.

As I have repeated, I do not follow the particular details regarding documents which meet or fail to meet IRCC standards for proof of language.

And as I previously noted:

. . . for the OP it is difficult to identify what in particular the problem is. BUT whatever the problem is, it is fairly likely it has to do with the content or quality of the documents submitted, perhaps some more or less technical detail. After all, just because a piece of paper is titled "Diploma" (or such) does not, in itself, mean a whole lot.

Additionally, just because the paper displays the name of an educational institution does not necessarily mean it is a recognized institution. I believe someone else responding to the OP raised a question about verification the entity issuing the documentation meets IRCC standards.

And of course that does raise the question about how a prospective applicant would know with confidence that his or her diploma or transcript will meet IRCC standards. I do not know the answer to this.

Or, as I also noted, for the OP there could have simply been a mistake by the IRCC processing agent. Happens. Unfortunately. Not often I hope.


Compare Normal Times:

By the way, in normal times there is far less suspense. Almost all applications submitted around the same time get AOR around the same time. If an applicant sees forum reporting that others applied the same time as she did are getting AOR, and especially if there are a significant number who submitted applications later than that who are reporting AOR, in normal times that is a strong signal something was off with the application and there is a strong probability the application is on its way back to the applicant, as incomplete.

If the application gets AOR status, that means it passed the completeness screening. It could run into other problems later, but AOR means the application has been accepted as complete and will be processed.

Things are turned around some now. From what I have seen in the forum anecdotal reporting, it appears that incomplete applications are being returned sooner than AOR is being issued. And there appears to be a large block of applications submitted between February and late April, perhaps into May, for which many applicants still have no indication of AOR. But more recently submitted applications which fail the completeness screening are being returned.

So right now, this year, in the current situation, it is more difficult to sort out and identify what is happening, let alone why.


A further observation:

To the extent I have commented, soon after the shutdown began I tended to suggest NOT rushing to apply now, that this was a good time to WAIT longer to apply. To sit things out for a bit to see how things were going to go.

IRCC is a bureaucracy, a big bureaucracy (at least by Canadian standards). Bureaucracies tend to have trouble whenever things wander even a little bit outside the normal lanes. Bureaucracies do not handle complications well. And this is a gross understatement, whereas Covid-19 in contrast has done far more than just introduce some complications. This is largely uncharted territory for a bureaucracy like IRCC.

So a lot of those who have ventured forth to apply since March this year have chosen to sail into these uncharted waters. We are likely to see more than a few twists and turns in how things go.

Of course those who applied in the months just before March had little or no warning things were likely to get, well, so complicated.

In any event, there will undoubtedly be many waiting to see how things turn out for them, and waiting longer than most have had to wait for many years. Things are likely to be, let's say, "interesting" for awhile, probably a long while.

 

[PM_ME_UR_REJECTION_REASON]

The only proof you have to show during the interview is the original diploma that you submitted with your application.

I submitted the original of the transcript. So am i screwed now? I don't have a copy of it.

 

[rafzy]

I submitted the original of the transcript. So am i screwed now? I don't have a copy of it.

Well technically IRCC should be sending you back your originals after sending AOR to you for your submitted application. If they don't, just let the officer know and show him/her copies of originals.

 

[PM_ME_UR_REJECTION_REASON]

Well technically IRCC should be sending you back your originals after sending AOR to you for your submitted application. If they don't, just let the officer know and show him/her copies of originals.

I thought people only got their file back for incomplete application...