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

Application Status Online

PMM

VIP Member
Jun 30, 2005
25,494
1,950
Hi

syedrahman1980 said:
smokey, may i suggest you something ?

As my case is almost like you and i am also waiting for a rejection letter, I decided i would write a letter to CIC after receiving their refusal letter explaining their rule of exceptions (application between 27 Feb-28 Nov 2008) as an appeal.

Can you not write a letter to CIC as an appeal ? and lets see whats happen. At least nothing to lose if a letter is written to take an opportunity.


Good luck.


SYED
There is no "rule of exceptions", no experience in the "list" refusal. The only exception would be if you had a years experience in the list, when the application was opened, but didn't when you applied, it would be processed. The same as when you applied your experience in the "list" was 9 years ago and when the application was opened, the 1year experience on the list, the experience total was now more than 10 years ago. You still have to had experience in the "list" for 1 year between Feb/98 and Nov/09.



PMM
 

syedrahman1980

Hero Member
Mar 28, 2009
291
1
Dear PMM
Did you see the link :

http://www.cic.gc.ca/EnGLIsh/resources/manuals/op/op06-eng.pdf page 17

OP 6 Federal Skilled Workers 2009-05-08 17
Applications that do not correspond to the Ministerial Instructions are not eligible for processing. In these cases, applicants will be sent a letter indicating that they are not eligible for processing and that a refund will be issued.

Note: Exceptions apply to applications received between February 27, 2008, and November 28, 2008. Someone who meets the requirements of the Ministerial Instructions today, but did not meet them on the application received date, should be assessed in relation to today's date and not the application received date. For someone who met the requirements as of the application received date, but no longer meets them, the reference point should be the application received date. The rule of thumb is to apply the requirements in a manner that favors the client. Applicants could not self screen before the Ministerial Instructions were made public.

Substituted evaluation cannot be used to overcome failure to meet the Ministerial Instructions.


Pls put your valuable comment for help of others.

Thanks.

SYED
 

PMM

VIP Member
Jun 30, 2005
25,494
1,950
Hi

syedrahman1980 said:
Dear PMM
Did you see the link :

http://www.cic.gc.ca/EnGLIsh/resources/manuals/op/op06-eng.pdf page 17

OP 6 Federal Skilled Workers 2009-05-08 17
Applications that do not correspond to the Ministerial Instructions are not eligible for processing. In these cases, applicants will be sent a letter indicating that they are not eligible for processing and that a refund will be issued.

Note: Exceptions apply to applications received between February 27, 2008, and November 28, 2008. Someone who meets the requirements of the Ministerial Instructions today, but did not meet them on the application received date, should be assessed in relation to today's date and not the application received date. For someone who met the requirements as of the application received date, but no longer meets them, the reference point should be the application received date. The rule of thumb is to apply the requirements in a manner that favors the client. Applicants could not self screen before the Ministerial Instructions were made public.

Substituted evaluation cannot be used to overcome failure to meet the Ministerial Instructions.


Pls put your valuable comment for help of others.

Thanks.

SYED
Read my previous reply about "exceptions"

"The only exception would be if you had a years experience in the list, when the application was opened, but didn't when you applied, it would be processed. The same as when you applied, your experience in the "list" was 9 years ago and when the application was opened, the 1year experience on the list, the experience total was now more than 10 years ago. You still have to had experience in the "list" for 1 year between Feb/98 and Nov/09."

It is a very narrow exception, you still require 1 years experience on the list that falls between Feb/98 and Nov/08

PMM
 

syedrahman1980

Hero Member
Mar 28, 2009
291
1
PMM, i could not understand your explanation about exceptions. If any one understands it and clarify.

But I thank PMM for your reply.

I work as marketing manager with more than 12 years experience in marketing profession. The job is not included in 38 NOC list now. But when I applied in June 2008, my job was included in their job requirement (NOC code 0611). I understood from the link (in my previous reply) that my case may be an exception and CIC might think me positively, if other factors of mine are accepted. Many of us also think like that.




Thanks.

SYED
 

smokey

Full Member
Jul 11, 2008
29
0
syedrahman1980 said:
smokey, may i suggest you something ?

As my case is almost like you and i am also waiting for a rejection letter, I decided i would write a letter to CIC after receiving their refusal letter explaining their rule of exceptions (application between 27 Feb-28 Nov 2008) as an appeal.

Can you not write a letter to CIC as an appeal ? and lets see whats happen. At least nothing to lose if a letter is written to take an opportunity.


Good luck.





SYED
Hi Syed,
Thanks. As i have already got the rejection letter, so i don't think i am going to go for appeal or anything...However, the exemption statement on page 17 of that document does clearly indicate that cases like this should have given consideration as long as they met the immigration requirement on that received date. Otherwise, the requirement of at least 1 year experience for listed 38 occupation within 10 years (as explained by PMM) would not in fact be an exemption. May be i am missing something here, but the exemption statement (on page 17) does not mean anything (related with 1 year experience in 38 categ) like PMM suggested. For instance, had i had at least 1 year experience in one of those 38 list, i would have qualified under the new rule without this exemption. Hopefully PMM would help us understand...
Smokey