Applicant from PhD program after 5 Nov, 2011 connect here to get status

[seoul]

Hi All,

I was following this forum for a week. I was going to apply under PhD stream tomorrow. But with today's development of phdapplicant I decided not to file for now.

I have read all the posted message. I have also read the stories from NER to PER. I think its really not justified what CPP-O has done. In many cases (according to this forum) CIO-sydney has overturned NER to PER giving them the adaptability point (5 points). By CPP-O not giving the adaptability point all those people who appealed loose their time as well as the application fee. How can be there two different interpretation for a document within people of same organization.

It must be hard for all the people in this situation. I would suggest to send all the first rejection letter, the appealed document, the PER issued and then this recent email to both the CIC and CPP-O.

 

[hamed_hamed]

Hi All,

I was following this forum for a week. I was going to apply under PhD stream tomorrow. But with today's development of phdapplicant I decided not to file for now.

I have read all the posted message. I have also read the stories from NER to PER. I think its really not justified what CPP-O has done. In many cases (according to this forum) CIO-sydney has overturned NER to PER giving them the adaptability point (5 points). By CPP-O not giving the adaptability point all those people who appealed loose their time as well as the application fee. How can be there two different interpretation for a document within people of same organization.

It must be hard for all the people in this situation. I would suggest to send all the first rejection letter, the appealed document, the PER issued and then this recent email to both the CIC and CPP-O.

I agree. This is not fair. Losing time and money because of different interpretations.

 

[TyrusX]

Hi All,

I was following this forum for a week. I was going to apply under PhD stream tomorrow. But with today's development of phdapplicant I decided not to file for now.

I have read all the posted message. I have also read the stories from NER to PER. I think its really not justified what CPP-O has done. In many cases (according to this forum) CIO-sydney has overturned NER to PER giving them the adaptability point (5 points). By CPP-O not giving the adaptability point all those people who appealed loose their time as well as the application fee. How can be there two different interpretation for a document within people of same organization.

It must be hard for all the people in this situation. I would suggest to send all the first rejection letter, the appealed document, the PER issued and then this recent email to both the CIC and CPP-O.

Yes. I believe CIC is not caring at all about the interpretation of those criteria. It seems that if you appeal, they will just revert the NER to PER, washing their hands and keeping the money.

 

[seoul]

Yes. I believe CIC is not caring at all about the interpretation of those criteria. It seems that if you appeal, they will just revert the NER to PER, washing their hands and keeping the money.

Exactly, but that's wrong. That's why you guys should let both CPP-O and CIO know the situation. Either CIO should admit it was a mistake from their side and they are responsible or CPP-O should give the adaptability point. It is clearly a point of injustice. You guys can also send the documents (the first rejection letter, the appealed document, the PER issued and then this recent email) to local MPs as one of the member suggested before.

 

[MapleDream]

I bet is that they were thinking of PhD Students who completed their Master/MBA degree in Canada.

It's very sad to hear your news. I'm very similar as you and afraid that I may receive my bad news later.
Since I were the first one who appealed the NER decision here, I am wondering they don't realize this problem before my case. They may have to reconsider their decision about this kind of refusals such that they are consistent with CIO. If I'm refused with the same reason they gave me the NER, how could they explain that? For applicants, CIO and CPP belong to Canada Immigrant Department, we don't know who is who. Keeping a consistent and reasonable decision system is their responsibilities. Or what they did was a kind of cheat.

I agree with you. But students who completed their master degree in Canada mostly applied provincial nominee program. That is faster than federal program. TyrusX was right the PhD stream was not at careful discretion.

 

[anjuku]

I just got an email from Ottawa regarding my appeal. They refused to give me 5 adaptability points since I did not completed a program of study (even though I have completed two years of study at a Canadian post-secondary institution).

They still re-open my case since I have gained a new Canadian citizen relative recently

Hey that's great news that they decided to re-open your file
however it's still bad news for those relying on those 5 adaptability points from previous study
i think they decided to re-open your case because you provided new information which could not have been provided with your initial application (a new relative in canada)...however, i don't think they will give credit if you provide new letters for work experience which you chose not to claim with your initial application...but that's just my take on the whole thing!

 

[anjuku]

i wonder what's going on at CIC?..no updates on the Ph.D stream cap??...no news releases regarding MI5??...I believe the FSW1 cap resets on July 1st if MI5 isn't released before that...something seems terribly wrong!

 

[Luigiovemma]

Yes. I believe CIC is not caring at all about the interpretation of those criteria. It seems that if you appeal, they will just revert the NER to PER, washing their hands and keeping the money.

Sneaky them!!! If this is truly the case, people can sue them...

 

[Aaron2012]

i wonder what's going on at CIC?..no updates on the Ph.D stream cap??...no news releases regarding MI5??...I believe the FSW1 cap resets on July 1st if MI5 isn't released before that...something seems terribly wrong!

If they were lazy to update the figures, then I think that figure should be updated on July 1st.

Just called call centre about why the figure was not updated, they just turned down my question and let me check the web. What a easy job for them!

 

[Dani1982]

It's very sad to hear your news. I'm very similar as you and afraid that I may receive my bad news later.
Since I were the first one who appealed the NER decision here, I am wondering they don't realize this problem before my case. They may have to reconsider their decision about this kind of refusals such that they are consistent with CIO. If I'm refused with the same reason they gave me the NER, how could they explain that? For applicants, CIO and CPP belong to Canada Immigrant Department, we don't know who is who. Keeping a consistent and reasonable decision system is their responsibilities. Or what they did was a kind of cheat.

I agree with you. But students who completed their master degree in Canada mostly applied provincial nominee program. That is faster than federal program. TyrusX was right the PhD stream was not at careful discretion.

@MapleDream : your application is our last hope for this adaptability points

 

[johnyoung1984]

Can anyone tell me where can I find the Phd cap? thx!

 

[websphereguy]

Can anyone tell me where can I find the Phd cap? thx!

Right at the bottom of this link http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/immigrate/skilled/complete-applications.asp

 

[ejamal]

http://www.theprovince.com/touch/business/story.html?id=6850692

 

[moonbow2010]

http://www.theprovince.com/touch/business/story.html?id=6850692

Bad news! They left us with no choices except PNP or CEC.

Finding jobs or being nominated by provincial governments are the only way out.

 

[TyrusX]

Bad news! They left us with no choices except PNP or CEC.

Finding jobs or being nominated by provincial governments are the only way out.

Ok. Let's be calm. I actually believe this is good news for US (IN CAPS). Why? Because they will focus on the current applications instead of the new applications from a new MI-5.