+1(514) 937-9445 or Toll-free (Canada & US) +1 (888) 947-9445

SuperVisa Denied prior to submitting PGP

hakanz

Newbie
Oct 24, 2016
7
0
Hello, my mother's super visa application recently got refused, and according to the refusal letter they're also barring her from traveling to Canada for 5 years.
The reason was- previously denied US visa, which she declared but apparently the explanation wasn't sufficient!

Meanwhile, I happened to get selected to apply for a PR under Family Class Sponsorship this year, which needs to be submitted in the next few days.
At this point I don't believe it's worth submitting the application, however my father does not have a 5 year ban, even though his super visa was also refused at the same time.

Does anyone know or have any suggestions as to whether it's logical to apply under Family Class just for him as per the eligibility, or does it have to be both or none since they both were included in the original PGP request?

Appreciate your feedback and/or suggestions!

Thanks.
 

scylla

VIP Member
Jun 8, 2010
96,505
22,588
Toronto
Category........
Visa Office......
Buffalo
Job Offer........
Pre-Assessed..
App. Filed.......
28-05-2010
AOR Received.
19-08-2010
File Transfer...
28-06-2010
Passport Req..
01-10-2010
VISA ISSUED...
05-10-2010
LANDED..........
05-10-2010
Hello, my mother's super visa application recently got refused, and according to the refusal letter they're also barring her from traveling to Canada for 5 years.
The reason was- previously denied US visa, which she declared but apparently the explanation wasn't sufficient!

Meanwhile, I happened to get selected to apply for a PR under Family Class Sponsorship this year, which needs to be submitted in the next few days.
At this point I don't believe it's worth submitting the application, however my father does not have a 5 year ban, even though his super visa was also refused at the same time.

Does anyone know or have any suggestions as to whether it's logical to apply under Family Class just for him as per the eligibility, or does it have to be both or none since they both were included in the original PGP request?

Appreciate your feedback and/or suggestions!

Thanks.
You're right. Unfortunately the PGP is not worth submitting since it will end in refusal due to the 5 year ban. This impacts both of your parents. There is no way to sponsor just your father. Your mother needs to be admissible in order for your father's PR visa to be approved. Sorry.
 
  • Like
Reactions: YVR123

scylla

VIP Member
Jun 8, 2010
96,505
22,588
Toronto
Category........
Visa Office......
Buffalo
Job Offer........
Pre-Assessed..
App. Filed.......
28-05-2010
AOR Received.
19-08-2010
File Transfer...
28-06-2010
Passport Req..
01-10-2010
VISA ISSUED...
05-10-2010
LANDED..........
05-10-2010
Hello, my mother's super visa application recently got refused, and according to the refusal letter they're also barring her from traveling to Canada for 5 years.
The reason was- previously denied US visa, which she declared but apparently the explanation wasn't sufficient!

Meanwhile, I happened to get selected to apply for a PR under Family Class Sponsorship this year, which needs to be submitted in the next few days.
At this point I don't believe it's worth submitting the application, however my father does not have a 5 year ban, even though his super visa was also refused at the same time.

Does anyone know or have any suggestions as to whether it's logical to apply under Family Class just for him as per the eligibility, or does it have to be both or none since they both were included in the original PGP request?

Appreciate your feedback and/or suggestions!

Thanks.
As an aside, it's interesting that she declared the refusal but was still issued a misrepresentation ban. That doesn't quite make sense to me. What did she declare in her original application and what was the refusal reason IRCC gave and also the reason for the misrepresentation ban? This seems very unusual.
 

hakanz

Newbie
Oct 24, 2016
7
0
As an aside, it's interesting that she declared the refusal but was still issued a misrepresentation ban. That doesn't quite make sense to me. What did she declare in her original application and what was the refusal reason IRCC gave and also the reason for the misrepresentation ban? This seems very unusual.
It is odd, and we have not been able to figure out what she could have done better to not get penalized this way!
The US visa refusal (11 years ago) was due to the officer not being convinced of adequate ties with the home country. She originally provided a one line explanation stating that a US visitor visa was denied, which apparently wasn't enough; so she was asked to provide additional details, which she did in writing within 2 weeks. After that, it was a deny decision. Reason for misrepresentation ban was that the officer wasn't convinced of the explanation provided, or something along those lines.

I just thought I'd share this here as a response to your question, and also for the future applicants to be more descriptive ... assuming that would have helped in our case here!
 

scylla

VIP Member
Jun 8, 2010
96,505
22,588
Toronto
Category........
Visa Office......
Buffalo
Job Offer........
Pre-Assessed..
App. Filed.......
28-05-2010
AOR Received.
19-08-2010
File Transfer...
28-06-2010
Passport Req..
01-10-2010
VISA ISSUED...
05-10-2010
LANDED..........
05-10-2010
It is odd, and we have not been able to figure out what she could have done better to not get penalized this way!
The US visa refusal (11 years ago) was due to the officer not being convinced of adequate ties with the home country. She originally provided a one line explanation stating that a US visitor visa was denied, which apparently wasn't enough; so she was asked to provide additional details, which she did in writing within 2 weeks. After that, it was a deny decision. Reason for misrepresentation ban was that the officer wasn't convinced of the explanation provided, or something along those lines.

I just thought I'd share this here as a response to your question, and also for the future applicants to be more descriptive ... assuming that would have helped in our case here!
Yeah - that seems odd. I really can't comment further on the misrepresentation finding without seeing the exact text of the refusal letter.