does the new 2 years rule apply to those who as there pr one year ago

[parker24]

Read her short story a few posts prior (if you haven't) . . . sounds like she wants to 'revoke' PR that her "ex" now has. Not gonna happen!

When I saw who posted this thread, I shook my head and thought "What now..." *sigh*

 

[Fencesitter]

This is good news and something they should have done years ago!

But, does this mean that my wife and I fall under this new regulation? It's no big deal for us because we are happily married (with children)...but still, I'd like to know...

Thanks,
FS

 

[computergeek]

This is good news and something they should have done years ago!

But, does this mean that my wife and I fall under this new regulation? It's no big deal for us because we are happily married (with children)...but still, I'd like to know...

Thanks,
FS

No, it only applies to applications received by CIC on October 26, 2012 or later.

 

[real]

No, it only applies to applications received by CIC on October 26, 2012 or later.

hi im confused also, is this means that only those applicant October 25th this year and above will be fall on it? I mean they sent there application on or before october 25th. Because my husband sponsor approved last august 2012. And our application is on process until now. I'm only curious regarding this new info. But it's ok if they will implement this. I want to stay with my husband forever..

 

[parker24]

hi im confused also, is this means that only those applicant October 25th this year and above will be fall on it? I mean they sent there application on or before october 25th. Because my husband sponsor approved last august 2012. And our application is on process until now. I'm only curious regarding this new info. But it's ok if they will implement this. I want to stay with my husband forever..

If anyone submitted their application before Oct 26th, this rule does not apply to them.

 

[real]

OIC ...

 

[good234]

.

 

[good234]

.

 

[parker24]

.

Seriously, stop. You are starting to look nuts and obsessive. Please, move on with your life.

 

[truesmile]

I take it the " . "s are moderator removed posts?? Wow, good memory Parker!! But I knew the posts you referring to as soon as you mentioned.

 

[computergeek]

I take it the " . "s are moderator removed posts?? Wow, good memory Parker!! But I knew the posts you referring to as soon as you mentioned.

No, I think that is the OP bumping the message so that it is still visible. A moderator could remove the entire post.

 

[good234]

computergeek you dont have to say what you just said that is not nice you dont even know me

 

[computergeek]

You think that saying the reason for adding a '.' to the thread to bump it is pejorative or offensive? Wow.

Well, I certainly did not intend to offend you. Even now I'm trying to figure out why you would take offense at that, but some people are rather sensitive. So my apologies for offending you.

 

[parker24]

You think that saying the reason for adding a '.' to the thread to bump it is pejorative or offensive? Wow.

Well, I certainly did not intend to offend you. Even now I'm trying to figure out why you would take offense at that, but some people are rather sensitive. So my apologies for offending you.

It's possible that she is confusing what I said to what you said. Since I know I was a little harsh and blunt.

 

[McDutch]

I don't see the point in this thread