hardness and cruelty of some CIC offciers

[alaabebe]

That's quite interesting - I was under the impression that the only period that could be under review is the 4 year time frame prior to the signing of the application.

alaabee - Did the letter provide a reason for refusal? I wasn't able to tell by your original comment but did your wife and son get to see the judge?

Unfortunately , it's a twist of fate
there was no judge and they met with the same frown cruel officer again
she grill them and gave them the hardest time on earth
my son went to see the doctor , as he got shocked of the interrogation and the way she treated him he said as if a criminal
will raise a formal complaint against her aided with a medical report
i spoke within the community and have got similar sufferance and torture from her
we smell a profile with sort of racist approach here

 

[nope]

Why won't you explain what the actual issue was?

The value of this forum is not people agreeing with you that your CIC officer was wrong, but rather in looking at facts and details of your case.

 

[arambi]

Why won't you explain what the actual issue was?

The value of this forum is not people agreeing with you that your CIC officer was wrong, but rather in looking at facts and details of your case.

Agree. Can you tell exactly what the Officer is saying you did wrong (allegations) and the facts you have that shows that those allegations are unfounded or not supported by facts that are true?

I had a case of misrepresentation against me... When I showed to the judge that CIC got the facts wrong and based its case on a wrong interpretation of the law, the case was swiftly dismissed.

Please clearly laid out the facts so we can help you.

 

[scylla]

Unfortunately , it's a twist of fate
there was no judge and they met with the same frown cruel officer again
she grill them and gave them the hardest time on earth
my son went to see the doctor , as he got shocked of the interrogation and the way she treated him he said as if a criminal
will raise a formal complaint against her aided with a medical report
i spoke within the community and have got similar sufferance and torture from her
we smell a profile with sort of racist approach here

None of this is going to help you. You are facing a misrepresentation charge (i.e. lying in the application). You need to prove there was no misrepresentation. Officers grill people when they suspect they are lying - that's how it works. It's going to do you no good to prove someone was stressed out by being grilled. You need to prove there was no lie in the application. If there was in fact a lie - then forget about doing anything - your family member was correctly refused and shouldn't have lied in the application.

I agree with everyone else. It's very strange you refuse to specifically address the misrepresentation here. That leads us to assume the misrepresentation finding was correct.

 

[nkam]

All members in the forum are anonymous, sharing with all whatever misrepresentation allegations you faced will not make things worse but may be beneficial to you if you get some helpful recommendations as what you need to do. There are many people here who have in-depth knowledge and exposure which any enlightened person cannot underestimate.

Many of the senior members spend their own time to help others honestly and without any reward as opposed to Consultants who get paid by hours. You should really feel free and share the allegations you are facing. No one knows or interested to know your identity and as such there is neither element nor benefit of being with or against you.

There are misrepresentation cases which have been challenged in Court and were successful in Judicial reviews and you could be able to win a judicial review and turns this completely into your favor. It all depends on the facts and the legal argument as well as the evidence to prove the officer was wrong without being emotional.

 

[Canadiandesi2006]

All members in the forum are anonymous, sharing with all whatever misrepresentation allegations you faced will not make things worse but may be beneficial to you if you get some helpful recommendations as what you need to do. There are many people here who have in-depth knowledge and exposure which any enlightened person cannot underestimate.

Many of the senior members spend their own time to help others honestly and without any reward as opposed to Consultants who get paid by hours. You should really feel free and share the allegations you are facing. No one knows or interested to know your identity and as such there is neither element nor benefit of being with or against you.

There are misrepresentation cases which have been challenged in Court and were successful in Judicial reviews and you could be able to win a judicial review and turns this completely into your favor. It all depends on the facts and the legal argument as well as the evidence to prove the officer was wrong without being emotional.

I agree with you, at time unintentionally due to some misunderstanding some of us land in tough situations. I bet some readers here are more knowledgeable than most immigration consultants / attorneys by experience of regularly following cases, situations faced by others.

Encourage candidates to share problems, readers based on their shared knowledge can help to steer you in the right direction.

 

[alaabebe]

You need to provide more information if you want actual advice.

It seems from your first sentence that you applied for citizenship in early 2012, so time from before 2010 would have definitely been a part of the qualifying period. When exactly did you apply?

CIC said that they committed misrepresentation. What specifically was the misrepresentation and how did you try to argue against it?

Two points :
1. when she listed the four children one of them was not a student in one year out fo the four , this one is not even in her application , they said why did you mention he was a student while he was not ??!!!!!!!!!!!
2. the time of issuance of one old passport early 2010 , which was an old version and has been replaced by another new automated digitized version , while copy has been delivered...

most of the time were questioned about a period of time outside the citizenship application period , eight years back

 

[alaabebe]

It sounds to me like CIC belives you misrepresented some information in your application for the 2007 to 2010 period. This is why you have been banned from reapplying for 5 years.

When did you apply for citizenship? Which month and year?

I strongly believe I answered all these in my previous text! look into and you would find all details needed.
Just like this , because the officer found mispresentation , the officer banned her for five years
I have been part of the same file and have been granted the citizenship one year back
the citizenship application was submitted on may 2014 backward to may 2010.
areas of conners is a significant unfairness in handling files and decision made based on personal discretion of the officer
this substantial decisions which define people destiny and their future must not left for the discretion of some one and all people must be dealt with on solid basis of justice

there a significant violation of judicial process

 

[alaabebe]

Well, if they suspect misrepresentation, they can trace back more than that, right?

This is not exactly right because they have undergone extensive investigations for two years and based on its results we have been granted the renewal of our permanent residences
CIC must respect CIC previous resolutions , right?!

 

[alaabebe]

I don't think we have the full story on dates. My guess is that they applied for citizenship well before 2014 and then their citizenship applications were held up while PR was renewed. I don't believe the four year period before they applied for citizenship is May 2010 to May 2014. I think the four year period is actually quite a bit earlier - so the examination of 2007 to 2010 isn't that odd.

I advice you read the whole story and then you would find that they applied on may 2014 for four year starting may 2010
period before that has been covered in the renewal of the PR's .

i have few concerns :
1. unfairness
2. overriding previous resolution made
3. leaving decision for officers
4. My wife and son were supposed to see a judge and have been prevented and replaced by the same officer who reviewed their file and made the negative decision
5. We have some doubts on a profile of prejudice
6. my wife and son have been in ottawa for the last six years of their life continuously

I hope you got it

 

[torontosm]

This is not exactly right because they have undergone extensive investigations for two years and based on its results we have been granted the renewal of our permanent residences
CIC must respect CIC previous resolutions , right?!

As has been stated previously, the CIC review related to the renewal of your PR card is entirely different than the review for citizenship. So, if your residency was "approved" for the PR card, that doesn't necessarily mean that the CIC doesn't have the right to review the residency again when you apply for citizenship. They may choose to rely upon the previous review, but are under no obligation to do so.

 

[screech339]

This is not exactly right because they have undergone extensive investigations for two years and based on its results we have been granted the renewal of our permanent residences
CIC must respect CIC previous resolutions , right?!

Review of PR status for PR renewal has nothing to do with citizenship review. Completely independent of one another. In fact it is probably two different departments. Whatever review you went through for PR renewal, stays with PR department. If citizenship wants to review your PR status once again (PR status must be valid), it is their prerogative.

 

[nkam]

If I understood correctly, the OP was somewhat questioning the basis of the PR renewal that goes back in the past beyond the reference period of four years? Please confirm!

Can you quote part of the CO wording of the alleged misrepresentation?
Clearly identifying the core issue will make it easier to get help from the senior people here. Readng between the lines, it sounds like a question of their establishment in Canada.

If you are confident there were no ouvert misrepresentation and that it was an error that the average reasonable person can commit or that it was not material to the determination of denying citizenship and banning them for five years, you better off challenge it after obtaining legal advice as soon as you can because time is of essence.

 

[h3a3j6]

Alaa,

Please take a deep breath and try to provide a detailed timeline of your immigration process from the moment you and your family landed until today.

I understand that this may be an emotionally stressful period, but you need to factor out all emotions and be as pragmatic as possible so that people on this forum can provide you with some information that can help you. Your story is difficult to follow as you've been throwing bits and pieces around and I personally have found it challenging to understand it.

Cheers.

 

[Almost_Canadian]

Two points :
1. when she listed the four children one of them was not a student in one year out fo the four , this one is not even in her application , they said why did you mention he was a student while he was not ??!!!!!!!!!!!
2. the time of issuance of one old passport early 2010 , which was an old version and has been replaced by another new automated digitized version , while copy has been delivered...

most of the time were questioned about a period of time outside the citizenship application period , eight years back

I refer to your 2nd point. Can I presume that you provided them with the copy of newer automated digitized copy passport but not the older one ? Possibly you don't have that older one ? And then that would make them suspicious.
As others have said, you need to be more open and provide more details.