Got my first GCMS notes.......needs help

[Carbide86]

Hi carbide 86,

I have already submited my employment letter for my experience for NOC 0621 during feb 2013 to may 2014. But during my study i was also working in convenience store during 2012 and 2013. I didn't send that employment letter as i thought it won't b necessary. So what do you think should I send old LOE or i shoud wait for document request from CIC.

Hi aa1129,

In this moment I think just wait until the second VO ask you to submit the missing or additional information then, Potentially they will require some more information for the next review and that mean it's should be a good sign for you my friend.

Good Luck

 

[Dimadima]

hi,
This is my first GCMS notes

I am June 6th applicant 2014
AOR 18yh June 2014
MR watting

WORK EXPERINCE: CEC qualifying period is from 06 june2011 to 05june2014 Dates of authorized work experience -within 'Qaligying Period'-in a skill level O, A or B occupation:
18 APR 2012 TO 30JUL2013 Category of work permit: Spouses of students C42 Post-secondary studies in Canada: None According to schedule 8: Work Experience,. 27AUO2012 TO O7OCT2012, NOC: 7311 selected,
Full time INDUSTRIAL MECHANIC with XXXXXX INC. Employment letter(s) dated 220CT2013 confirm(s) date(s) of employment, position title and a salary of $40K per year. Both a T4 and a NOA from 2014
show(s) reported earnings of $31.4K. A NOA from 2012 show(s) reported earnings of $15K. The job description provided in the letter(s) of employment appears to have been partially drawn or drawn directly from HRSDC websile. There is no specific detail in the list of duties that differentiates the work from the generic description provided by HRSDC. web-based search conducted - Online information verified.
Pay stubs on file. LANGUAGE: CELPIP submited- applicant meets benchmarks for work experience at this skill level B.
REVIEW REQUIRED BY OFFICER.

I would be very grateful for any advice

 

[viscaelbarca]

How you get that detailed of your application using GCMS note ?
I also apply for GCMS note month ago, I got email, with 50 pages *.pdf files, with scanned all of my documents which I sent to them. Only on first page I have a my record check - something like a timeline. Where I see when my appliacation reach a CIC office, when was a scanned, created a AOR, transffered to Ottawa. Last line said - " Recommend review. Proof of certification to be requested - 17.02.2015".
Your note is much longer and have more details what is going on with file.

 

[Dimadima]

How you get that detailed of your application using GCMS note ?
I also apply for GCMS note month ago, I got email, with 50 pages *.pdf files, with scanned all of my documents which I sent to them. Only on first page I have a my record check - something like a timeline. Where I see when my appliacation reach a CIC office, when was a scanned, created a AOR, transffered to Ottawa. Last line said - " Recommend review. Proof of certification to be requested - 17.02.2015".
Your note is much longer and have more details what is going on with file.

I guess, you requested the file documents
I requested only "notes"

 

[viscaelbarca]

I guess, you requested the file documents
I requested only "notes"

Could you tell me in which step I have to choose a notes ? not file documents ?

 

[Dimadima]

hi,
This is my first GCMS notes

I am June 6th applicant 2014
AOR 18yh June 2014
MR watting

WORK EXPERINCE: CEC qualifying period is from 06 june2011 to 05june2014 Dates of authorized work experience -within 'Qaligying Period'-in a skill level O, A or B occupation:
18 APR 2012 TO 30JUL2013 Category of work permit: Spouses of students C42 Post-secondary studies in Canada: None According to schedule 8: Work Experience,. 27AUO2012 TO O7OCT2012, NOC: 7311 selected,
Full time INDUSTRIAL MECHANIC with XXXXXX INC. Employment letter(s) dated 220CT2013 confirm(s) date(s) of employment, position title and a salary of $40K per year. Both a T4 and a NOA from 2014
show(s) reported earnings of $31.4K. A NOA from 2012 show(s) reported earnings of $15K. The job description provided in the letter(s) of employment appears to have been partially drawn or drawn directly from HRSDC websile. There is no specific detail in the list of duties that differentiates the work from the generic description provided by HRSDC. web-based search conducted - Online information verified.
Pay stubs on file. LANGUAGE: CELPIP submited- applicant meets benchmarks for work experience at this skill level B.
REVIEW REQUIRED BY OFFICER.

I would be very grateful for any advice

 

[Dimadima]

Could you tell me in which step I have to choose a notes ? not file documents ?

line:
*What type of information would you like to request?

-Physical file
or
-Notes in electronic file.

If you are requesting a Physical file that could have originated overseas, note that CIC may experience delays in the receipt of documents. This could result in a delayed response to your request. However, by selecting Notes in electronic file, your request will be processed within the legislated deadline.

If you want a case status update, it can be obtained by selecting Notes in electronic file.

 

[rks0101]

hi Rks0101,

Before submitting my file, i talked to lawyer about my salary she advised me that my salary is enough for my city. But if i want to check how can i check for my city.

Can you please also help me like what kind of proofs i can provide to CIC for the scope of the work of the NOC ? If i ask for another employment letter but the duties will be the same so does it make any difference ?

Hi Aa1129,

To check by city you could use the site per link http://www.jobbank.gc.ca/report-eng.do?lang=eng&noc=0621&area=9219&titleKeyword=department+store+manager&regionKeyword=Toronto,+Ontario&source=1&action=final You could go one level up and choose NOC and city which applies to you. I tried NOC 0621 and Toronto in the link just to test if it works.

This give the hourly rates.

You could provide office documents signed by you, business emails/letter, other business documents done by you or showing you as being responsible or being a party in the work or emails /letters/instructions/job descriptions from others which show your works w.r.t. to your NOC. While submitting these you may choose to erase the dollar values and other details which may be business confidential and by erasing which you do not hide your involvement in that work.

Hope this helps!

 

[rks0101]

hi,
This is my first GCMS notes

I am June 6th applicant 2014
AOR 18yh June 2014
MR watting

WORK EXPERINCE: CEC qualifying period is from 06 june2011 to 05june2014 Dates of authorized work experience -within 'Qaligying Period'-in a skill level O, A or B occupation:
18 APR 2012 TO 30JUL2013 Category of work permit: Spouses of students C42 Post-secondary studies in Canada: None According to schedule 8: Work Experience,. 27AUO2012 TO O7OCT2012, NOC: 7311 selected,
Full time INDUSTRIAL MECHANIC with XXXXXX INC. Employment letter(s) dated 220CT2013 confirm(s) date(s) of employment, position title and a salary of $40K per year. Both a T4 and a NOA from 2014
show(s) reported earnings of $31.4K. A NOA from 2012 show(s) reported earnings of $15K. The job description provided in the letter(s) of employment appears to have been partially drawn or drawn directly from HRSDC websile. There is no specific detail in the list of duties that differentiates the work from the generic description provided by HRSDC. web-based search conducted - Online information verified.
Pay stubs on file. LANGUAGE: CELPIP submited- applicant meets benchmarks for work experience at this skill level B.
REVIEW REQUIRED BY OFFICER.

I would be very grateful for any advice

Hi Dimadima,

The conflict is seen in the following GCMS notes:

''Employment letter(s) dated 220CT2013 confirm(s) date(s) of employment, position title and a salary of $40K per year. Both a T4 and a NOA from 2014 show(s) reported earnings of $31.4K. A NOA from 2012 show(s) reported earnings of $15K...'' 40k vrs 31k vrs 15k!!!

First of all I would advise you to check if above statement is the correct facts. What the statement does not record is the earnings in 2013! If CIC does not have this data please provide them asap. If this was close to $40k as per the employment letter then probably you are safe. If not then you need to explain why it was lower than 40k, urgently to CIC before your case gets rejected. If you were doing the NOC duties in 2012, 2013 and 2014 you need to re-iterate that in your statement to CIC. Then you also need to explain why 2012 earning was 15K only, was it only for a part of the year? Same for 2014, you need to explain why this (31K) was so far from 40k! You need to present figures and explanation to justify that these figures are not in contradiction to the letter of employment, asap to CIC.

Hope this helps!

 

[Dimadima]

Hi Dimadima,

The conflict is seen in the following GCMS notes:

''Employment letter(s) dated 220CT2013 confirm(s) date(s) of employment, position title and a salary of $40K per year. Both a T4 and a NOA from 2014 show(s) reported earnings of $31.4K. A NOA from 2012 show(s) reported earnings of $15K...'' 40k vrs 31k vrs 15k!!!

First of all I would advise you to check if above statement is the correct facts. What the statement does not record is the earnings in 2013! If CIC does not have this data please provide them asap. If this was close to $40k as per the employment letter then probably you are safe. If not then you need to explain why it was lower than 40k, urgently to CIC before your case gets rejected. If you were doing the NOC duties in 2012, 2013 and 2014 you need to re-iterate that in your statement to CIC. Then you also need to explain why 2012 earning was 15K only, was it only for a part of the year? Same for 2014, you need to explain why this (31K) was so far from 40k! You need to present figures and explanation to justify that these figures are not in contradiction to the letter of employment, asap to CIC.

hi rks0101
I didn't work in 2014.
My statment and T4 only for 2012 - 4 mounth
2013 - 9 mounth

I don't know where they get 2014 year!

 

[rks0101]

hi rks0101
I didn't work in 2014.
My statment and T4 only for 2012 - 4 mounth
2013 - 9 mounth

I don't know where they get 2014 year!

Hi Dimadima,

Thanks for the info, now it seems to make some sense to me. Assuming that in your GCMS notes, 2014 is stated by typing error and actually means 2013 then 31k over 9 months means @ of 41k/year, which is matching your employment letter statement. 15k in 2012 over 4 months means @ of 45k/year, which is again matching your employment letter statement. If 4 months and 9 months were continuous 13 months then this means 46k over 13 months, which equates to @ of 42k/year which is also matching the employment letter.

If 4 months and 9 months were continuous 13 months, then probably the Visa officer would see this easily in his review. Even if 4 and 9 months were not continuous, then too your monthly rates are above the rates given in the employment letter. Visa officer would certainly see this in his review.

I do not think there is an issues here, so you might as well order another GCMS notes and wait to see the results of the officer review. I believe officer review if not clear to the officer would result into a query to you which could respond when it comes. Certainly there cannot be any rejection on this basis without a query to the applicant.

The other way is send an pre-emptive email to CIC saying that earnings in 2013 and 2012 are at the same monthly rate as 40k/year of the employment letter and individual annual earnings are lower than 40k/year as months worked were 9 and 4 months respectively in 2013 and 2012. There is no harm in making this statement in a letter or email as it is restatement of the earning facts.

Hope this helps!

 

[nirirome]

Hey,

I applied in JUNE 2014.
Got AOR on AUGUST 2014.

Ordered my GCMS notes and now i know it went to for second review.

WORK EXPERIENCE: CEC qualifying period is: 30JUN2011 TO 29JUN2014 Dates of authorized work experience- within 'Qualifying Period'- in a skill level 0,A,or B occupation:
Work Experience 1:30JAN2016 to LOCK-IN, NOC:6314 selected, Full time Supervisor with Innovative Vision. Employment letter(s) dated 26JUN2014 confirm(s) date(s) of employment, position title salary of $12.00/HR. LOE/Supporting Docs do NOT appear to match lead statement and/or a substantial number of the main duties under NOC code selected.
RECOMMENDATION: REVIEW REQUIRED BY OFFICER.


Please help. Don't know what to do?
Thank You

 

[nirirome]

Hey,

I applied in JUNE 2014.
Got AOR on AUGUST 2014.

Ordered my GCMS notes and now i know it went to for second review.

WORK EXPERIENCE: CEC qualifying period is: 30JUN2011 TO 29JUN2014 Dates of authorized work experience- within 'Qualifying Period'- in a skill level 0,A,or B occupation:
Work Experience 1:30JAN2016 to LOCK-IN, NOC:6314 selected, Full time Supervisor with Innovative Vision. Employment letter(s) dated 26JUN2014 confirm(s) date(s) of employment, position title salary of $12.00/HR. LOE/Supporting Docs do NOT appear to match lead statement and/or a substantial number of the main duties under NOC code selected.
RECOMMENDATION: REVIEW REQUIRED BY OFFICER.

Should I send a new LOE with more details.
Or should I wait for CIC to ask for it.
Please help. Don't know what to do?
Thank You

 

[rks0101]

Hey,

I applied in JUNE 2014.
Got AOR on AUGUST 2014.

Ordered my GCMS notes and now i know it went to for second review.

WORK EXPERIENCE: CEC qualifying period is: 30JUN2011 TO 29JUN2014 Dates of authorized work experience- within 'Qualifying Period'- in a skill level 0,A,or B occupation:
Work Experience 1:30JAN2016 to LOCK-IN, NOC:6314 selected, Full time Supervisor with Innovative Vision. Employment letter(s) dated 26JUN2014 confirm(s) date(s) of employment, position title salary of $12.00/HR. LOE/Supporting Docs do NOT appear to match lead statement and/or a substantial number of the main duties under NOC code selected.
RECOMMENDATION: REVIEW REQUIRED BY OFFICER.


Please help. Don't know what to do?
Thank You

Hi Nirirome,

I believe is good to revise the letter, but when you send the revised letter it would be equally important to mention the logical reason why was the letter revised.


Hope this helps!

 

[nirirome]

Hi Nirirome,

I believe is good to revise the letter, but when you send the revised letter it would be equally important to mention the logical reason why was the letter revised.


Hope this helps!

Thanks, but does someone had this similar problem and what did they do?