Changes to Immigration Regs affecting spousal/cl/cp applications expected soon.

[rjessome]

The chatter in the legal community is that this is going to happen sometime this fall however this is NOT confirmed. The government posted the proposed changes in the Canadian Gazette in April of this year (a requirement before an Act of Parliament can be amended).

Here is the Gazette posting:

http://gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p1/2010/2010-04-03/html/reg1-eng.html

The Canadian Immigrant magazine does a good job of explaining in basic terms what this means:

http://www.canadianimmigrant.ca/newsandviews/news/article/6878

IMHO, this is going to mean more refusals which in turn will result in an even larger backlog at the IAD. Oy vay!

To anyone who is planning to apply under this class in the future, PREPARE WELL! Marriage has long been viewed as the "easiest" way to get into Canada and with all the press regarding fraudulent marriages in the last couple of years, this government is reacting by making the rules even more strict.

On the bright side, hopefully this means there will be fewer victims of fraud. On the dark side, applicants and sponsors need to get VERY SERIOUS about their applications (as if they weren't already!) and never assume anything when it comes to immigration. Refusals will be common and will have nothing to do with genuiness but rather, because the VO feels the marriage was entered into for the primary purpose of immigrating to Canada. In other words, a VO could believe your marriage is real but that the only reason your spouse met and married you in the first place was because they wanted to immigrate to Canada.

I'm not posting this to scare anyone. Those who are already in process need not worry about these changes (which have NOT been proclaimed yet) as applicants in process would be assessed under the former Regs. But I've been around here long enough to know there are many readers who are thinking about getting married and/or sponsoring their partner at a later date and want them to be aware that it's going to get tougher and they need to be very thoroughly prepared.

In all honesty, my greatest fear is for those sponsoring partners from 3rd world countries where the socio-econmic status differs greatly as well as those entering arranged marriages. This is where the greatest impact will be felt in my view.

 

[CharlieD10]

OMG. I know you didn't mean to do it, but thanks for scaring the dickens out of me, as we haven't filed yet and probably will not until Dec2010 or Jan2011. ???

 

[rjessome]

I know and I'm sorry! Geez, I can imagine the negative karma now. Sigh.

But look at this from a strategic standpoint. Assuming the amendments will be proclaimed before the end of the year, you have to prepare your application proving 2 things now instead of 1. Technically, you had to prove both before but you couldn't be refused if the marriage was deemed to be genuine even if the VO felt that it was entered into for the purpose of immigrating to Canada. So everyone focused on proving genuineness. Now, by removing "AND" and inserting "OR" in this Regulation, you actively have to prove both. You will have to spend time and effort proving that immigrating to Canada was not a factor when deciding to get married. It's definitely more work but could be easily proven if you focus time and attention on how well established the applicant is in their home country using things such as a job, ownership of properties, education, etc.

I never like situations where you have to prove the negative, i.e. I did NOT enter this marriage for the purpose of immigrating to Canada. However, it can be done with a well prepared arguement.

I can see potential court challenges to this amendment but only after the proverbial crap hits the fan with the IAD screaming for relief, media getting involved, etc. But that will take a long time and won't help anyone who is applying in the meantime after proclaimation. This government is intent on making these changes so creating a strategy now will benefit anyone who has not applied yet.

 

[HoneyBird]

:'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'(
:'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'(
:'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'(
:'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'(
:'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'(
:'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'(
:'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'(
:'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'(
:'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'(
:'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'(
:'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'(
:'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'(

 

[sbwv09]

It's better to know and be prepared, right? You're right... it's good to know NOW, gather evidence NOW, keep every little piece of everything.

It's sad though.. I mean, take my situation. We want to be together and married. One lives in the US, another in Canada. He could come to the US, but we decide on Canada based on several factors. We get married and apply for PR. If they wanted to, they could say "Oh, the marriage was for immigration!". Well, I did want to enter Canada, yes, but I want to do so to be with my husband, not to better my circumstances (my circumstances were NOT improved by leaving the US!). It seems that many people are like this... I know many couples who don't believe in marriage but did so because that's the only way they can be with their partner who happens to be in Canada. Is that fraud? I don't think so, but maybe the VOs will!

It just seems to me the VOs will have another reason to skew things their way.. if they wished to.

 

[CharlieD10]

You will have to spend time and effort proving that immigrating to Canada was not a factor when deciding to get married.

I never like situations where you have to prove the negative, i.e. I did NOT enter this marriage for the purpose of immigrating to Canada. However, it can be done with a well prepared arguement.

As an accountant with some training in auditing, let me tell you it is almost impossible to prove a negative. Did I know that I would probably have to migrate when I decided to marry my husband? Yes. Was it a deciding reason in getting married? No. But how do I show that? Nowhere in any of our discussions did this arise. It was taken for granted that, as the one who is childless, I would give up my family so he could remain close to his children. I am well-educated, but am I well-paid enough that I would lose in migrating? No, I am from a "Third World" country, I do not earn anywhere near what my qualifications would net me in Canada. This has now become an obstacle for me, not something that would make me an asset as an immigrant!

It seems to me that the more steps they take to bar unlawful immigration, the more they punish those who try to do it lawfully.

 

[lynw]

Thanks for the information rjessome. Changing that "and" to an "or" seems eminently reasonable to me, and I wonder if that was the original intent of the wording, and it was just badly put.

Using another person, messing with their hearts and lives, for purposes of entry to a particular country is abhorrent.

 

[giggles1985]

Wow, I really think I could been seen to fall into that category if you were only using one of the criteria. My relationship with my husband is genuine and we want to be together as soon as possible so we married as the "fastest way to immigrate" so you might say that my marriage is for the purpose of immigration. If that's how a VO wants to look at it, that could be some real trouble.

 

[dair2dv8103100]

This just does not surprise me in the least.

 

[Love_Young]

I think everyone should plan their application carefully anyway even before the regulation change.
I think that if you are in a genuine relationship and continue to be in one at the time you are approved for PR status then you should have nothing to worry about.

Please don't be scared. Immigration and Canada are just wanting to protect those of us that are in it to be reunited with our families. Those of us that didn't do it to cheat the system. If you have a genuine relationship and you know you didn't do it to achieve status then I am sure the IO will be able to see this. Of course you get a share of actual true couples that are refused but for the most part I think the IO's know when to suspect something. And again, if they do suspect something suspicious in your case just order your CAIPS or FOSS notes and come prepared to prove them wrong. Don't give them a reason to refuse.

As much as we may feel like they are against us. They really are just trying to help and protect us.
I would be lying though if I said I wasn't scared because in a way I still am. But this is my life and it is a genuine as it is ever going to be. If I have to prove it more then I will. I am prepared to fight for my love.

 

[HoneyBird]

Well, I did want to enter Canada, yes, but I want to do so to be with my husband, not to better my circumstances (my circumstances were NOT improved by leaving the US!).

the same for me. my circumstance will not be improved by leaving Trinidad. I will have to start over with less vacation. I understand its two weeks vacation whilst I had 3 weeks plus 5 days casual, I will be forfeiting my Gratuity Payment (20% of basic salary) if i break contract to be with my husband thats roughly around 3000 CAD a year. And I almost worked two years!

I have 12 months of sunshine vs...cold stinky winters in Canada.

The standard of living is cheaper, I can buy things on a whim unlike when I travel to canada, it pains me to buy something becuase I know its cheaper in Trinidad.

I am leaving sun, sea and sand, I absolutely love the beach. And the life is a slower pace >

Finally I am leaving my entire family, my apartment, my car, half my belongings and after converting my TTD to CAD, its 6tt to 1 cad, I am basically looking at very little money in my hands to buy very little things in comparison.

shit my husbands apartment is half the size of mines in Trinidad. I am sick of these VO people.

So you know what I think if I have an interview I am gonna point all that out to the VO officer.

 

[lynw]

Wow, I really think I could been seen to fall into that category if you were only using one of the criteria. My relationship with my husband is genuine and we want to be together as soon as possible so we married as the "fastest way to immigrate" so you might say that my marriage is for the purpose of immigration. If that's how a VO wants to look at it, that could be some real trouble.

They don't talk specifically about marriage though; they're referring to entering the _relationship_. ie what was the sponsored person's original intention? That's how I read it anyway.

 

[lynw]

the same for me. my circumstance will not be improved by leaving Trinidad. I will have to start over with less vacation. I understand its two weeks vacation whilst I had 3 weeks plus 5 days casual, I will be forfeiting my Gratuity Payment (20% of basic salary) if i break contract to be with my husband thats roughly around 3000 CAD a year. And I almost worked two years!

I have 12 months of sunshine vs...cold stinky winters in Canada.

The standard of living is cheaper, I can buy things on a whim unlike when I travel to canada, it pains me to buy something becuase I know its cheaper in Trinidad.

I am leaving sun, sea and sand, I absolutely love the beach. And the life is a slower pace >

Finally I am leaving my entire family, my apartment, my car, half my belongings and after converting my TTD to CAD, its 6tt to 1 cad, I am basically looking at very little money in my hands to buy very little things in comparison.

So you know what I think if I have an interview I am gonna point all that out to the VO officer.

High five! I've given up material possessions, house, peace and quiet, low cost of living also, and am now looking at taking a run of the mill job rather than running my own business. The NZ exchange rate is also pretty bad, so also find everything expensive here. If it wasn't for love, why on earth would we be doing this?

 

[journeyman]

Thanks for posting this rjessome. I think forewarning those on the forum and any future couples is a very good thing. Planning an application with this in mind can only help to strengthen it and possibly avoid some refusals (for that you get my positive karma ).

SBW, I agree with you on your points as well. Our decision to marry was also driven in part by the immigration process. If we were both in Canada or US, we probably would not have "married", at least not as soon as we did. In the future alot of marriages could come into question because of this, if the officer chooses to. Marriage in some cases becomes the default since it is more difficult for common law and in particular conjugal partner applications (I have a failed one of those too). Some VO could take the failed conjugal app as our motivation to marry so my husband could come to Canada, in our case. I also think that in the case of Canada/US relationships you could make the point that the other party's circumstances are not "improved". There are plusses and minuses to each scenario, and it is a personal decision between the couple, which they choose, being together being the real and ultimate goal. Other extraneous factors, such as a better life in Canada does not apply to us, as much as it does with relationships from many other countries.

 

[HoneyBird]

I am really sorry for the new people entering the system...
maybe they need lie detector tests or something to quickly eliminate people who are the cheats.