Suggestion needed to appeal the refusal letter

[mapleleafland]

I just got refusal letter for the TRV for my mom on these grounds

• I am not satisfied that you will leave Canada at the end of your stay as a temporary resident, as stipulated in paragraph 179(b) of the IRPR, based on the purpose of your visit.

• I am not satisfied that you will leave Canada at the end of your stay as a temporary resident, as stipulated in paragraph 179(b) of the IRPR, based on your travel history.

What are my options now. Should I reapply with new fees and new application ? Is there a way I can address these concerns in my new application, or is there a way I can appeal to the refusal ?

She has no travel history , I can not address that. How else can I show that she will leave Canada in the visa duration

 

[Naturgrl]

I just got refusal letter for the TRV for my mom on these grounds

• I am not satisfied that you will leave Canada at the end of your stay as a temporary resident, as stipulated in paragraph 179(b) of the IRPR, based on the purpose of your visit.

• I am not satisfied that you will leave Canada at the end of your stay as a temporary resident, as stipulated in paragraph 179(b) of the IRPR, based on your travel history.

What are my options now. Should I reapply with new fees and new application ? Is there a way I can address these concerns in my new application, or is there a way I can appeal to the refusal ?

She has no travel history , I can not address that. How else can I show that she will leave Canada in the visa duration

You reapply. What is her profile other than no travel history? Is her whole family in Canada and does she live in her home country.

 

[mapleleafland]

You reapply. What is her profile other than no travel history? Is her whole family in Canada and does she live in her home country.

She is a home maker and lives in her home country with my brother. But she has assets and bank accounts , which I did not attached in the TRV as I applied
through new portal and they did not ask. Do you think I should reapply immediately and attach these as her ties ? What else I can do.

 

[scylla]

She is a home maker and lives in her home country with my brother. But she has assets and bank accounts , which I did not attached in the TRV as I applied
through new portal and they did not ask. Do you think I should reapply immediately and attach these as her ties ? What else I can do.

Rather than rushing to reapply, it might be a good idea to order GCMS notes and wait for them to arrive. That way you'll be able to see the detailed reasons behind the refusal and be better positioned to put together a strong reapplication.

 

[mapleleafland]

Thank you for the suggestion. Do you think there would be some thing else that I might find other than what they have explained ? do you think it might be related to ties to the country ? I mean my mom's case is a typical case of home maker with minimal financial strength and I see from the posts on these forums that they get approved so I am wondering what I might have missed ?

Rather than rushing to reapply, it might be a good idea to order GCMS notes and wait for them to arrive. That way you'll be able to see the detailed reasons behind the refusal and be better positioned to put together a strong reapplication.

 

[Naturgrl]

"Purpose of visit" is a general term that can mean many things so GCMS will clarify the reasons. It could be financials, lack of home ties, too long of visit requested as examples.

 

[scylla]

Thank you for the suggestion. Do you think there would be some thing else that I might find other than what they have explained ? do you think it might be related to ties to the country ? I mean my mom's case is a typical case of home maker with minimal financial strength and I see from the posts on these forums that they get approved so I am wondering what I might have missed ?

That's why I'm recommending GCMS notes.

 

[Sledge]

Not wishing to be a wet blanket, I know the standard advice is to order the GCMS notes. I'll accept scylla's word that they often contain "detailed" reasons. I have only my own experience upon which to draw. In my case, the notes added absolutely no reasons beyond the "form letter" wording contained in the refusal letter. It was a wasted exercise.

My request for GCMS notes DID in fact have detailed notes that we were able to address. Luck of the draw I suppose.

 

[SeniorStakes]

She is a home maker and lives in her home country with my brother. But she has assets and bank accounts , which I did not attached in the TRV as I applied
through new portal and they did not ask. Do you think I should reapply immediately and attach these as her ties ? What else I can do.

Did you consider supervisa? You still need to prove the non-immigration intent which you can do by enclosing these documents:
1. Declaration letter from your brother that he is aware of your mom's temporary nature of visit
2. Property documents where you mom is solo owner or joint owner with your brother
3. If you brother is young, he may need your mom around - put docs pertaining to that
4. If you mom pays Income Tax, attach ITR docs

 

[Sledge]

Yes, I suppose you are right. Not sure what happened in our case. As I said, in our case, the notes added not a word in addition to the standard boilerplate language set out in the refusal letter. Although I am a lawyer myself, I am not an immigration lawyer. So I had an immigration lawyer look it over to see if I was perhaps missing something buried in all those pages of crap. Nope.

In the administrative law circles with which I am familiar (and I have done my fair share of judicial reviews of provincial administrative tribunal decisions) a failure to give adequate reasons is a denial of natural justice and grounds for review. Here is but one example, drawn from a residential tenancy case:

Laverdure v. First United Church Social Housing Society, 2017 BCSC 1439

https://www.bccourts.ca/jdb-txt/sc/17/14/2017BCSC1439.htm

See para. 26 et seq.

The lawyer with whom I spoke was a member of the Calgary law firm that successfully prosecuted the JR in Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Vavilov, 2019 SCC 65, but even she was not confident of a win, given the Federal Court's long history of tolerating the IRCC's long history of providing no reasons, or inadequate reasons. In some ways, the IRCC appears to be above the courts. The courts do its bidding perhaps. IRCC would probably tell Trudeau himself to pound sand and get away with it.

I might have tried on a JR just on spec, but then along came covid, rendering the whole exercise a bit futile.

Our notes document was 36 pages, with the VO notes on the final page, which was quite detailed.