Got Procedural Fairness Letter! HELP PLEASE!!
- Thread starter next444
- Start date
If it was right , why many people’s applications are being sent for review by a senior officer ?
Oh ok.
I am not hurt nor angry. I do not understand how you come to that conclusion. I simply asked what medium and whom did you use to communicate in order for me to check where this inconsistency is coming from.
Anyways , I was not supposed to hurt anybody here , if anybody is right , he or she I’ll definitely go through . Sorry if I said anything wrong , but I can’t tolerate the manipulation of the system , and leaving many deserved people behind . Dnt mind
There are many reasons as to why applications are sent for review by a senior officer. You and I cannot know the reason unless we somehow receive the GCMS notes for those in question.
In fact, it is a common procedure for files to be reviewed by senior officers before PPR request is sent.
My point is, you are in a situation and you chose to act one way, others are in other situations and decided to act differently, it is not for you to judge. Let IRCC do its job. If this approach is wrong, it is not the end of live, in fact this is not matter of life and death, the individual will always find other ways to achieve his/her goals.
I understand your point.
I lose points due to age, education, and language when wife is accompanying.
I think the approach by IRCC is wrong to me in this regard. The spouse points for education and language should be considered under bonus points. So rather than you losing points because you choose your spouse as accompanying, the spouse would have contributed to your CRS if education is evaluated and IELTS is given by the spouse. So, in my case, I should have remained 471 points, but if I did education evaluation for the spouse and IELTS, perhaps my points would have moved from 471 to something like 500, boosted by spouse's contribution. It might not mean much by the grand scheme of things (receiving ITA or not) but at least losing points because spouse would have been eliminated. This is just my thinking.
Good day all.
I will appreciate your help here. Submitted my application in November 2019, my husband travelled to the US and has insisted that he will come to Canada from the US. Knowing fully well that his Visa will expire this month. My dilemma is
1. I hope it won't affect my application as he wont be able to submit in the home country when we get a passport request? He has provided both medical and pcc even paid all the processing fees.
2. Can i declare him as unaccompanying so as it avoids any issues or delay. And what LOE do i write. Im confused.
Thanks
I will appreciate your help here. Submitted my application in November 2019, my husband travelled to the US and has insisted that he will come to Canada from the US. Knowing fully well that his Visa will expire this month. My dilemma is
1. I hope it won't affect my application as he wont be able to submit in the home country when we get a passport request? He has provided both medical and pcc even paid all the processing fees.
2. Can i declare him as unaccompanying so as it avoids any issues or delay. And what LOE do i write. Im confused.
Thanks
You can't declare him as unaccompanying if he's coming to join you in Canada from the US.
Dear,
To be honest I don’t know what would be the best situation as your spouse is not inland right now however he’ll be joining you very soon. Maybe post a new thread so you’ll get more advices.
Unfortunately the customer service agents on the phone or twitter are not always right.
Given that non-accompanying actually means to not to be together it is not surprising that inland applicants are being given POF. Large volumes of people are doing this. In the past very few attempted this. It is pretty brazen to state that someone one is not accompanying you but plans on living with you in Canada during the sponsorship process. Would be less expensive and likely faster for a spouse to return home for 6+ months.
Given that non-accompanying actually means to not to be together it is not surprising that inland applicants are being given POF. Large volumes of people are doing this. In the past very few attempted this. It is pretty brazen to state that someone one is not accompanying you but plans on living with you in Canada during the sponsorship process. Would be less expensive and likely faster for a spouse to return home for 6+ months.
Update of my own case: status in cic account changed from “we’re reviewing the documents you provided” to “ Not applicable”
hopefully it’s a sign of them accepted my explanation.
hopefully it’s a sign of them accepted my explanation.
Will do! Hope this thread would help folks are in the similar situation.
How is yours? Any PPR yet?