FSW ITA - to accept of reject ITA?

[goldday]

Hi guys
I recently got an ITA to apply under FSW even though i am qaulified for both CEC and FSW. the only stupid thing is i should have deleted the prove of funds part so i wont get invited for fSW. I did have the funds stated earlier but life happened and now i dont have enough money in my account for the prove of funds thing. I am currently employed but through PGWP as such my employment is not based on LMIA.
Im wondering now if to reject ITA or would my current job that is not based on LMIA be ok?
Has anybody been in a similar situation? I would greatly appreciate helpful opinions

 

[scylla]

No - your job isn't enough. If you don't have the funds, you should decline ITA.

 

[rezasorna]

Hi guys
I recently got an ITA to apply under FSW even though i am qaulified for both CEC and FSW. the only stupid thing is i should have deleted the prove of funds part so i wont get invited for fSW. I did have the funds stated earlier but life happened and now i dont have enough money in my account for the prove of funds thing. I am currently employed but through PGWP as such my employment is not based on LMIA.
Im wondering now if to reject ITA or would my current job that is not based on LMIA be ok?
Has anybody been in a similar situation? I would greatly appreciate helpful opinions

It is hot debate for this question. Based on what is written on CIC website, you should have that money, but some members said if you submit T4, pay stubs, NOA, etc along with whatever money you have in your account, provided that you have a job in Canada they may accept it. I am in the same boat myself. Trouble is even if you set your available funds to zero, before ITA, still system categorize you as eligible for FSW.

 

[ounjal]

Unfortunately proof of funds is MANDATORY for FSW.

The majority of immigrants are coming to Canada from poor countries for a better life , they therefore will not have much money available. CIC has obviously purposefully made it so that if one qualifies for both CEC (no POF required) and FSW, that FSW ITA will be offered. This will result in many applicants not being eligible, which suits their agenda, for it is election year this year.

 

[goldday]

Thanks guys for your replies. im 50/50 between declining and accepting now because if i push it close to the 54 or so days i have left on the ITA i should be able to have that amount from my job but that being said....i just get a statement from the bank stating my current bank balance and previous balances for the past 6 months and investments if any right?

 

[dobes]

Thanks guys for your replies. im 50/50 between declining and accepting now because if i push it close to the 54 or so days i have left on the ITA i should be able to have that amount from my job but that being said....i just get a statement from the bank stating my current bank balance and previous balances for the past 6 months and investments if any right?

If you can get there or close in the time you have before filing, I would go ahead and file. It isn't certain that you will get another ITA so it would be a shame to lose this one.

The purpose of the rule is to show that you can support yourself and family, if any, while in Canada without relying on public funds. The question is how bureaucratic the VOs are going to be in the form your proof of funds takes. If you can show that your job is ongoing - that is, not a contract job - and that you have been supporting yourself in Canada and paying your Canadian taxes - shouldn't that be enough? That is what we don't really know, because few (including myself) have been brave enough to apply with liquid funds far below the requested level, but a Canadian salary above it. My funds were just above the needed level for two people - and I included my T4 and NoA for added measure. I didn't rely on it.

I hope one day someone can come back here to say that ongoing Canadian salaries above LICO level are enough for demonstrating your ability to support yourself. But until then, you're taking a risk if you rely on that alone.

That said - if I had had to take that risk, I would have. The logical stance is that an ongoing salary in a permanent job under an open work permit should be enough to show you can support yourself. I can't see a logical reason why that would be rejected as PoF - only a bureaucratic one.

 

[goldday]

If you can get there or close in the time you have before filing, I would go ahead and file. It isn't certain that you will get another ITA so it would be a shame to lose this one.

The purpose of the rule is to show that you can support yourself and family, if any, while in Canada without relying on public funds. The question is how bureaucratic the VOs are going to be in the form your proof of funds takes. If you can show that your job is ongoing - that is, not a contract job - and that you have been supporting yourself in Canada and paying your Canadian taxes - shouldn't that be enough? That is what we don't really know, because few (including myself) have been brave enough to apply with liquid funds far below the requested level, but a Canadian salary above it. My funds were just above the needed level for two people - and I included my T4 and NoA for added measure. I didn't rely on it.

I hope one day someone can come back here to say that ongoing Canadian salaries above LICO level are enough for demonstrating your ability to support yourself. But until then, you're taking a risk if you rely on that alone.

That said - if I had had to take that risk, I would have. The logical stance is that an ongoing salary in a permanent job under an open work permit should be enough to show you can support yourself. I can't see a logical reason why that would be rejected as PoF - only a bureaucratic one.

Absolutely, I am already plotting strategies around it ie my spending and all that...the funny thing is if they go back six months into my accounts i more than had the minimum requirement but like l said life happened! On the other hand i think i will go ahead and apply, however ill hold off on the pof submission close to the expiry date of the ITA.
I really appreciate you guys' replies. It really brings some sort of clarity to an ambiguous situation that even CIC call centre agents cant wrap their head around. Ill def share what i end up doing and maybe help someone else that might be in this situation in the future out.
Thanks once again.

 

[ounjal]

Absolutely, I am already plotting strategies around it ie my spending and all that...the funny thing is if they go back six months into my accounts i more than had the minimum requirement but like l said life happened! On the other hand i think i will go ahead and apply, however ill hold off on the pof submission close to the expiry date of the ITA.
I really appreciate you guys' replies. It really brings some sort of clarity to an ambiguous situation that even CIC call centre agents cant wrap their head around. Ill def share what i end up doing and maybe help someone else that might be in this situation in the future out.
Thanks once again.

Unless your 6 month average meets POF requirement, you will not meet the criteria.

 

[dobes]

Unless your 6 month average meets POF requirement, you will not meet the criteria.

Evidence for this?

 

[ounjal]

on cic website.

need bank to show balance avg over 6 months i.e. can't be sudden occurrence of large sum of money.

 

[Hhh466]

on cic website.

need bank to show balance avg over 6 months i.e. can't be sudden occurrence of large sum of money.

Sorry but that is not true.

 

[ounjal]

Sorry but that is not true.

Sorry but that is true. Any large sums need to be explained. This has been thoroughly discussed in countless threads. Please use search function.