Officer in Canada office makes the following comments(REVIEW REQUIRED) .This application is pending the following items RPRF request initiated BF:30days "I have analyzed this application based on the following document submitted by the applicant and the information contained in the file and make the following recommendation. File requires Visa. ELIGIBILITY.....................................Principal Applicant .Foss Check: Refused applications and Departure Order. Passport valid until August 2022. IMM0008 edoc . PA PPT and counterfoil will be required . RPRF to be requested . Biometric fees exempt. Biometric results completed . Sponsor is living in Canada proof of relationship document IMM5532. SPR and PA listed as parent of Dependent child born in canada . SPR and PA are married . ADMISSIBILITY...........Schedule A provided, Police report provided. Info Sharing completed. File is transferred to Visa Office outside Canada"
Can Someone Explain this GCSM note says Review Required?
- Thread starter Attak
- Start date
So what then is the Officer recommending , visa require, RPRF to be initiated , PPT to be requested? This is where one get confused , what exactly the officer note is all about?Review almost certainly required because of the previous refusals and departure order.
Is that your question?
Review by someone more senior.So what then is the Officer recommending , visa require, RPRF to be initiated , PPT to be requested? This is where one get confused , what exactly the officer note is all about?
Oh I get your point on this , that means the file has been reviewed by an analyst and a recommendation is that the file requires visa. PPT to be requested , RPRF to be initiated BF 30days yet the analyst concerned FOSS check: Refused applications and Departure. Why will someone recommending RPRF and PPT request, file requires visa and yet concerned about refused applications .It becomes absurdity , and confusion. One will have to endure this ambiguity. Anyway thanks for your opinionReview by someone more senior.
If there are previous refused applications and voluntary Departure order can that affect the present application which is entirely new application and new evidence on family class sponsorship?Oh I get your point on this , that means the file has been reviewed by an analyst and a recommendation is that the file requires visa. PPT to be requested , RPRF to be initiated BF 30days yet the analyst concerned FOSS check: Refused applications and Departure. Why will someone recommending RPRF and PPT request, file requires visa and yet concerned about refused applications .It becomes absurdity , and confusion. One will have to endure this ambiguity. Anyway thanks for your opinion
If it leads them to doubt the new relationship is genuine, yes. And of course it will at least require them to look at that relationship carefully.If there are previous refused applications and voluntary Departure order can that affect the present application which is entirely new application and new evidence on family class sponsorship?
(I'm assuming no bans on entry to Canada and things like that, which may be issues you'll have to look at as well)
The Departure order was a voluntary order, no ban on entry. Obviously the previous application has no concern about the genuiness of the marriage except that the sponsor and PA could not live together continuously under the previous family class application in Canada class category was decided . This was the reason for refusal as applicant did not qualify in that In-Canada class category. This application is outland application where the applicant is still living in Canada on a failed refugee claim. The PA and SPR had long been married before the PA became refugee claimant. In short, the PA after marrying SPR was sponsored and the application was refused. the PA also then became a refugee claimant because the PA could not return to home country . The refugee claimant was also refused. SPR decided to sponsor PA for the second time with outland application. PA and SPR has a child born in Canada. This is the backgroundIf it leads them to doubt the new relationship is genuine, yes. And of course it will at least require them to look at that relationship carefully.
(I'm assuming no bans on entry to Canada and things like that, which may be issues you'll have to look at as well)
Sounds complicated. No surprise a review required.The Departure order was a voluntary order, no ban on entry. Obviously the previous application has no concern about the genuiness of the marriage except that the sponsor and PA could not live together continuously under the previous family class application in Canada class category was decided . This was the reason for refusal as applicant did not qualify in that In-Canada class category. This application is outland application where the applicant is still living in Canada on a failed refugee claim. The PA and SPR had long been married before the PA became refugee claimant. In short, the PA after marrying SPR was sponsored and the application was refused. the PA also then became a refugee claimant because the PA could not return to home country . The refugee claimant was also refused. SPR decided to sponsor PA for the second time with outland application. PA and SPR has a child born in Canada. This is the background