Conditional Visa's - It's Happening!

[Baloo]

Interesting....

I still feel that if the main goal is to reduce cases of marriage fraud, CIC should rather invest in resources who actually deal with fraud committed by people who landed in Canada as PRs than imposing conditions of any sort.

The problem is there is a BIG deficit in Canada and any government wants to reduce it - that generally mans cost cutting.
As a cost saving example, they have just announced limited opening times for some land border stations!!

I am thinking of all these couples where sponsors are trying to appeal the PR decision because once their "beloved" came to Canada they realized that the only thing they were interested in was immigration and not the sponsor.
It happens all too often.

I realize that it is harder to get somebody out of the country than into the country, but I feel there would be a ton of potential in dealing properly with these cases (as far as I understand such an appeal doesn't get anybody anywhere right now, which is really tragic).

Getting people out is far more than hard or difficult, it must be closing on impossible with huge timeframes.

An immigration officer can only guess if a marriage is genuine or not, whereas the actual spouse could (in most cases at least) do a much better job in that I would say (eg once the fraud is obvious).

But even spouses get it wrong

 

[jayde]

Close one loophole, scammers/fraudsters find another to open. It will deter one set, at least, those who are only in it for the short run and simply cannot see themselves doing anything but ditching the sponsor once they arrive on Canadian soil. Some hardened characters may be prepared to stick it out for 2 years, or as Baloo said, adopt the strategy of claiming abuse as others do in the US. It remains to be seen how they will be dealt with.

Either way, I see it as just the good "suffering" for the bad. It won't matter to genuine couples. For example, I have only know my husband for 2 years this month (hooray!) so if the amendments are passed and are applied to applications in progress (and likely will be) and we are still in progress, then we will be conditional. It may not add anything to our processing time for the visa, but it will add another step for us. Such is life.

Will it really add another step? The way I understood it, the "conditional" status of the PR will automatically be removed once the two years is up unless they feel the need to investigate. I may have misunderstood though?

 

[CharlieD10]

Will it really add another step? The way I understood it, the "conditional" status of the PR will automatically be removed once the two years is up unless they feel the need to investigate. I may have misunderstood though?

I need to see "automatically" defined by CIC before I take the position that it doesn't mean another step will be added. I am still waiting to see how this conditional PR business will affect the processing times for some of the offices like mine that are already averaging more than a year for 80% of cases. Which agency is going to be responsible for ensuring that the conditional status is lifted? Does "automatically" mean the PR has nothing more to do? Or will I have to fill in a form to request the change and that's it? How will I know it's been changed or that they have decided to investigate me? What will be the criteria for choosing people for investigation? There's just too much left unexplained.

 

[jayde]

I need to see "automatically" defined by CIC before I take the position that it doesn't mean another step will be added. I am still waiting to see how this conditional PR business will affect the processing times for some of the offices like mine that are already averaging more than a year for 80% of cases. Which agency is going to be responsible for ensuring that the conditional status is lifted? Does "automatically" mean the PR has nothing more to do? Or will I have to fill in a form to request the change and that's it? How will I know it's been changed or that they have decided to investigate me? What will be the criteria for choosing people for investigation? There's just too much left unexplained.

LOL omg... I already obsess over the process as it stands... I lose sleep over it and I find myself staring at these forums until the not-so-wee hours of the morning... I can't think about all those scenarios yet. I agonize over my sponsorship app... I need to remind myself, one step at a time and force myself to walk away from the computer.

You're right though, "automatically" does seem rather vague when you put it that way... /sigh

 

[LongTimeComing]

LOL Jayde!

I am so glad to hear that I am not the only one is obsessive! The last fews days it is not sleeping well, and upset stomach. I just keep thinking about the end result.

Conditional Visa - whatever... If it means having to prove even more. I don't care. I just want to be with my husband. You do whatever it takes.

 

[cndcit]

THIS is exactly what I want to see happen. 3 year undertaking = 3 year bar from being able to sponsor.

Surely this means a ban on sponsoring another spouse for 3 years? I hope not a 3 year ban to responsor the same spouse in the event of a negative outcome from an appeal, god forbid!

 

[missmini]

Surely this means a ban on sponsoring another spouse for 3 years? I hope not a 3 year ban to responsor the same spouse in the event of a negative outcome from an appeal, god forbid!

i think if the outcome is negative (= rejection) the period of undertaking and sponsorship does not exist; so u'll b actually b able to sponsor again, as soon as u want...but pls correct me if i'm wrong

 

[cndcit]

Is there any more news regarding these conditional visa's? Are these changes in effect? Are the changes to the regulations even defined yet?

 

[Darque]

It's really not that big of a deal if you are in a genuine relationship. Here's hoping that it deters people from fraudulently marrying Canadians if they know they have to spend 2 years with someone to achieve their goal. Some fraudsters will stick it out regardless but I would imagine it's going to put a lot of them off trying.

I've already been through the UK immigration process which has had conditional visas for some time, and it's not had any impact whatsoever on our relationship.

I had to apply for 6 months marriage visa (and get married within that time), then a 2 year conditional PR visa, then a permanent settlement visa and finally after five years, I applied for UK citizenship.

My husband and I must be crazy to have to do it all over again to move back to Canada to start a family

 

[rjessome]

Is there any more news regarding these conditional visa's? Are these changes in effect? Are the changes to the regulations even defined yet?

Nope, not yet.

 

[PMM]

Hi

Nope, not yet.

What should be interesting is that should a MOC make it through the Conditional visa stage, the proposed regulation that a sponsored spouse can't sponsor a spouse for 5 years after "landing"

 

[rjessome]

Hi

What should be interesting is that should a MOC make it through the Conditional visa stage, the proposed regulation that a sponsored spouse can't sponsor a spouse for 5 years after "landing"

Yeah. I actually wish they had only proposed that change rather than Conditional PR. Don't you think this whole things is going to be a nightmare to administer?

 

[PMM]

Hi

Yeah. I actually wish they had only proposed that change rather than Conditional PR. Don't you think this whole things is going to be a nightmare to administer?

Yes, especially since Dept. have been told that they have to reduce their expenditure between 5% and 10% over the fiscal year.

 

[rjessome]

Hi

Yes, especially since Dept. have been told that they have to reduce their expenditure between 5% and 10% over the fiscal year.

Oy vay!! But that's got me thinking. Don't you think it's a little strange that the government would introduce both of these amendments separately. Neither have been published in Part II of the Gazette yet (I check every Wednesday). I wonder if the conditional visas were just proposed to get votes? If you went to or saw any coverage of the town hall meetings about MOCs, you would see that they were populated heavily by the "ethnic" communities that Mr. Kenney is so famous for courting. Perhaps it will never reach the next stage. Maybe only the 5 year bar on sponsorship will become law. Easy to administer because it's just an extra checkbox for the reviewer at CPC-M and it also gets rid of that added "slap in the face" that often accompanies marriage fraud. Where the jilted sponsor is doubly humiliated because not only were they duped, but then their ex spouse turns around and sponsors a new spouse right away.

Things that make you go hmmm.

 

[Baloo]

Oy vay!! But that's got me thinking. Don't you think it's a little strange that the government would introduce both of these amendments separately. Neither have been published in Part II of the Gazette yet (I check every Wednesday). I wonder if the conditional visas were just proposed to get votes? If you went to or saw any coverage of the town hall meetings about MOCs, you would see that they were populated heavily by the "ethnic" communities that Mr. Kenney is so famous for courting. Perhaps it will never reach the next stage. Maybe only the 5 year bar on sponsorship will become law. Easy to administer because it's just an extra checkbox for the reviewer at CPC-M and it also gets rid of that added "slap in the face" that often accompanies marriage fraud. Where the jilted sponsor is doubly humiliated because not only were they duped, but then their ex spouse turns around and sponsors a new spouse right away.

Things that make you go hmmm.

Hmm, you are a very suspicious person, JUST LIKE ME

It could have been an exercise of smoke and mirrors.