Common Law sponsorship

[espresso87]

Hi there. Hoping that someone can help with this.
My fiancé and I have a very particular situation that I’m hoping someone can help with.
We began dating in 2018, started living in my parents house May 2018. We got engaged in February 2020. We are schedule to get married July 2021 (this year).

We applied for the common law sponsorship in December of 2019. My fiancé went for his medical in September of 2020 and a day ago we have just received a letter stating that the official is not satisfied with our proof for common law and is asking for some more documents to prove this further.

Here is our dilemma: We have been living in my parent’s house,just until we get married and my parents have agreed that we do not need to pay them rent. This means that the lease agreement is not present HOWEVER, we have a lot of other documents proving my fiancé’s address including drivers’ license same address, phone bill same address, taxes filed under same address, toms of proof of our genuine relationship and many letters to support. To supplement this lack of lease, we also have a letter from my dad stating that he has made an agreement with us for us to cohabitate under the address for the time being. Has anyone had an experience such as this one? Our immigration consultant suggested I send proof of our wedding receipts and everything booked, proof of my parents’ home ownership and further letters ( at least to show that they own the house and state that they have allowed and witnessed us living there). There isn’t much else we can possibly prove given the nature of this. It just seems unfair that they are questioning the validity only due to lack of a lease agreement. Almost as if they have completely overlooked all the other genuine proof.
My question is also, if they do refuse this inland application, is it possible in any way to submit another inland application or fight this somehow? We do not want to do outland application. Please advise.

 

[armoured]

Hi there. Hoping that someone can help with this.
My fiancé and I have a very particular situation that I’m hoping someone can help with.
We began dating in 2018, started living in my parents house May 2018. We got engaged in February 2020. We are schedule to get married July 2021 (this year).

We applied for the common law sponsorship in December of 2019. My fiancé went for his medical in September of 2020 and a day ago we have just received a letter stating that the official is not satisfied with our proof for common law and is asking for some more documents to prove this further.

Here is our dilemma: We have been living in my parent’s house,just until we get married and my parents have agreed that we do not need to pay them rent. This means that the lease agreement is not present HOWEVER, we have a lot of other documents proving my fiancé’s address including drivers’ license same address, phone bill same address, taxes filed under same address, toms of proof of our genuine relationship and many letters to support. To supplement this lack of lease, we also have a letter from my dad stating that he has made an agreement with us for us to cohabitate under the address for the time being. Has anyone had an experience such as this one? Our immigration consultant suggested I send proof of our wedding receipts and everything booked, proof of my parents’ home ownership and further letters ( at least to show that they own the house and state that they have allowed and witnessed us living there). There isn’t much else we can possibly prove given the nature of this. It just seems unfair that they are questioning the validity only due to lack of a lease agreement. Almost as if they have completely overlooked all the other genuine proof.
My question is also, if they do refuse this inland application, is it possible in any way to submit another inland application or fight this somehow? We do not want to do outland application. Please advise.

If you're going to claim you are common law, you may as well call him your spouse, not fiancé - that's what common law means.

You should have just signed a lease agreement, even for a modest sum. Unfortunately I don't have any suggestions as to what more you can add - only you know your situation. From what seems to have happened with other applicants in common law is either insufficient documentation to show when they STARTED living together (documents dated early) or insufficient demonstration that they have 'established a joint household.' (It's possible it is the latter if you and your spouse are living in parents' house and hence not really established your own joint household).

You can certainly apply for another inland agreement afterwards - the only issue being, the status of your spouse in Canada (which you don't mention and whether it is an issue).

The only concrete suggestion I can make right now is: go and get married right away. You can have a small civil ceremony, the smallest possible, in city hall (or whatever is available right now). This does NOT stop you from having your larger wedding ceremony as planned (religious or whatever you want) in July. And you can provide that documentation with whatever additional letter of explanation, attestations from friends, or whatever to help support.

Now a question I do not know the answer to: I am not certain that you getting married now settles the question (for IRCC purposes) of whether you were common law at the time you applied. But if it does not, you can withdraw and re-apply as soon as possible.

 

[espresso87]

If you're going to claim you are common law, you may as well call him your spouse, not fiancé - that's what common law means.

You should have just signed a lease agreement, even for a modest sum. Unfortunately I don't have any suggestions as to what more you can add - only you know your situation. From what seems to have happened with other applicants in common law is either insufficient documentation to show when they STARTED living together (documents dated early) or insufficient demonstration that they have 'established a joint household.' (It's possible it is the latter if you and your spouse are living in parents' house and hence not really established your own joint household).

You can certainly apply for another inland agreement afterwards - the only issue being, the status of your spouse in Canada (which you don't mention and whether it is an issue).

The only concrete suggestion I can make right now is: go and get married right away. You can have a small civil ceremony, the smallest possible, in city hall (or whatever is available right now). This does NOT stop you from having your larger wedding ceremony as planned (religious or whatever you want) in July. And you can provide that documentation with whatever additional letter of explanation, attestations from friends, or whatever to help support.

Now a question I do not know the answer to: I am not certain that you getting married now settles the question (for IRCC purposes) of whether you were common law at the time you applied. But if it does not, you can withdraw and re-apply as soon as possible.

So my spouse had his visitor visa extension denied, but we were told that he can stay as the application processes.
So if we do receive a refusal and are already married we can quickly put together another application inland?

 

[espresso87]

If you're going to claim you are common law, you may as well call him your spouse, not fiancé - that's what common law means.

You should have just signed a lease agreement, even for a modest sum. Unfortunately I don't have any suggestions as to what more you can add - only you know your situation. From what seems to have happened with other applicants in common law is either insufficient documentation to show when they STARTED living together (documents dated early) or insufficient demonstration that they have 'established a joint household.' (It's possible it is the latter if you and your spouse are living in parents' house and hence not really established your own joint household).

You can certainly apply for another inland agreement afterwards - the only issue being, the status of your spouse in Canada (which you don't mention and whether it is an issue).

The only concrete suggestion I can make right now is: go and get married right away. You can have a small civil ceremony, the smallest possible, in city hall (or whatever is available right now). This does NOT stop you from having your larger wedding ceremony as planned (religious or whatever you want) in July. And you can provide that documentation with whatever additional letter of explanation, attestations from friends, or whatever to help support.

Now a question I do not know the answer to: I am not certain that you getting married now settles the question (for IRCC purposes) of whether you were common law at the time you applied. But if it does not, you can withdraw and re-apply as soon as possible.

The status may be an issue as he may be sent an order to leave. Can we still send another inland application before that day arrives ??!

 

[armoured]

So my spouse had his visitor visa extension denied, but we were told that he can stay as the application processes.
So if we do receive a refusal and are already married we can quickly put together another application inland?

You will have to ask your lawyer about this. (This is a pretty important point that you left out of your post)

[I am tagging this thread as I often note here that for those that want to apply common law - which I have nothing against personally - it IS more risky in some cases than just getting married.]

 

[scylla]

The status may be an issue as he may be sent an order to leave. Can we still send another inland application before that day arrives ??!

Has his OWP been approved? Does he still have status in Canada right now?

 

[espresso87]

Has his OWP been approved? Does he still have status in Canada right now?

It was not approved yet and he does not have status. Our application we were told, waved this as he was being sponsored. (I was approved for sponsorship).

 

[scylla]

It was not approved yet and he does not have status. Our application we were told, waved this as he was being sponsored. (I was approved for sponsorship).

I don't understand what you mean by "waived this as he was being sponsored".

Anyway, the answer to your question is "it depends". If the OWP is approved before the application is refused, that would give him status in Canada and there shouldn't be an issue submitting another inland application. If the OWP is not approved and the application is refused, that will mean he's out of status in Canada as soon as the application is refused. Submitting a new inland application will not put him back in status. So there's always some risk with that.

Anyway - suggest you discuss with your lawyer.

 

[espresso87]

I don't understand what you mean by "waived this as he was being sponsored".

Anyway, the answer to your question is "it depends". If the OWP is approved before the application is refused, that would give him status in Canada and there shouldn't be an issue submitting another inland application. If the OWP is not approved and the application is refused, that will mean he's out of status in Canada as soon as the application is refused. Submitting a new inland application will not put him back in status. So there's always some risk with that.

Anyway - suggest you discuss with your lawyer.

Is it possible for the OWP to be accepted but for the application to be refused? We were able to send the initial sponsorship even with him being out of status so I was wondering if we sent it again even with him being out of status and now married (if it happens to be at that time) if we can do so inland?

 

[YVR123]

Is it possible for the OWP to be accepted but for the application to be refused? We were able to send the initial sponsorship even with him being out of status so I was wondering if we sent it again even with him being out of status and now married (if it happens to be at that time) if we can do so inland?

You own't be able to get OWP if he is out of status.

 

[scylla]

Is it possible for the OWP to be accepted but for the application to be refused? We were able to send the initial sponsorship even with him being out of status so I was wondering if we sent it again even with him being out of status and now married (if it happens to be at that time) if we can do so inland?

Was he already out of status when you sent the PR application? We really need all of these kinds of details or it's really impossible to help you and/or our advice may be completely wrong.

 

[espresso87]

Was he already out of status when you sent the PR application? We really need all of these kinds of details or it's really impossible to help you and/or our advice may be completely wrong.

Yes he was already out of status when we sent the pr application. We were able to proceed and send an application for PR as well as OWP application. If it was done once can it be done again?

 

[scylla]

Yes he was already out of status when we sent the pr application. We were able to proceed and send an application for PR as well as OWP application. If it was done once can it be done again?

That makes it messier. Sure, you can certainly submit an inland application again while he's out of status. But realize that submitting the inland application does not stop CBSA from removing him if they chose to do so. Things will start getting dicier with a second out of status inland application.

When did he fall out of status? Does he fall under the COVID policy to apply for restoration outside of the 90 days?

Given you've received the letter requesting more information, you're not going to get AIP until you address the concerns and AIP is required to get the OWP. So either you send evidence to convince them you are common law or you are most likely looking at a refusal (with no OWP approved).

IMO focus on proving you are common law so that your current application moves forward. Put all of your effort / focus there.

 

[espresso87]

He fell out of status before we sent the application for sponsorship. Okay so if we send out a sponsorship (new one, this time being MARRIED instead of common law) they can still remove him or give us troubles?

 

[scylla]

He fell out of status before we sent the application for sponsorship. Okay so if we send out a sponsorship (new one, this time being MARRIED instead of common law) they can still remove him or give us troubles?

Again, when did he fall out of status (i.e. exact date). There may still be a chance to restore based on the COVID restoration policy.

Yes, he can still be removed even if you are married. He's out of status.