How many background checks are normal?

[Soleil2020]

I've been trying to get a straight answer, but haven't have any luck.

When we first started this process, I had to do the police clearance , fingerprinting..etc..you know the drill.
Okay..fine..that was at the very beginning. As I have no criminal background and have nothing exciting about my background at all really, that's no big deal. ( As a teacher in the States, I've been through background checks too, so not unfamiliar with the process.)

Ok..fast forward 12.5 months from the time we sent our application in, after getting a member of Parliament to check into our case, we have been told it will not be done before the middle of July because they are conducting a second FBI clearance and that's what's holding it up. They have no idea how much longer it will take the FBI to finish their check and send it to Canadian Immigration. Then the CSIS has to do it own check on me.

The member of Parliament said that it was normal for there to be a second check, but it is the first and only time I've heard of such a thing on a case with no problems. I sent an email asking my attorney about this a week or so ago but received no response.

Anybody have any idea about this?

Thanks.

 

[SenoritaBella]

They can request the police clearance certificates(or FBI check) every year(they are only good for a year anyway). Your MP is correct.

CSIS is another agency nobody can give you answers about because everything is classified inclusing your security screening results. If there are any issues, they schedule a security interview and the wait after that could take years. There is one guy on the forum(forget his username), but he's had two such interviews(suspected of being a hacker), and was stuck in background checks for at least a year at the time.

Lastly, not sure what your lawyer fees are but if you haven't agreed on a fixed fee, you are going to have a hefty bill by the end of this process. You will be charged for him reading that email, looking up the information and replying(probably stating same thing as the MP). We have a lawyer too, and would not contact her for questions of this nature unless her advice is material.

My advice would be to try to relax and 'accept' there are parts of this process none of us can control.

 

[Soleil2020]

Thanks for your advice.

No, the lawyer will not be getting any more money from us , as we had a flat fee. The fee was to cover services until the process is over. They still are handling the case, so I still expect them to be answering questions we may have from time to time, especially as the questions we are asking are pretty basic questions related to the process. All forms from the immigration office are still going to them first.

And, no, there would be no reason for them to suspect I am a hacker or anything of the sort. I actually had a to chuckle a little bit at that comment. Not because I thought the poor guy's case you mentioned was funny, but the thought of me as a suspected hacker is hilarious. ( I'll have to suggest this to my 21 year old son who is often laughing at my lack of skills related to technology. It'll give him a laugh. )

There is nothing out of the ordinary about me at all. I'd even go as far as to say looking at my file must be boring. Speeding ticket when I was 20 and another when I was 48. GASP! Holy cr*p! and they let me roam freely?!

So anyway, I do appreciate your response, but I still don't know if that means EVERY person has 2 clearances. That's what the MP made it sound like. I was guessing 1 at the beginning to make sure the applicant isn't a convict and another at the end ...since the process takes so d*mn long, they have to verify the person has taken on a life of crime in the time it takes to land.

I don't know.

 

[Soleil2020]

.

 

[Edgehead78]

I bet your name is the same as someone who already had or has problems with the law. That's why the second check.

 

[Soleil2020]

I hope not. That would be a royal pain in the you know what.

So you think our ( well, actually my husband's. since I'm only a visitor ) Member of Parliament was lying to me or the Immigration office was lying to him when they that was normal and done that way for everyone?

Besides that, if that were the case, why would be get a letter saying they didn't need an interview? Certainly , if there was cause for concern on the first FBI clearance, they wouldn't be letting me go without an interview.

 

[SenoritaBella]

No, you were not interviewed because there are no questions about the genuineness of your relationship. Also, the officer reserves the right to interview at any point(even after waiving it) if new information comes to light. Even at your landing, there is a mini interview of sorts to ensure things are up to snuff.

Your MP has no reason to lie to you, either personally or politically(you can't vote anyway). The immigration office had to put that in writing to the MP and I can't imagine them lying(what do they have to gain?). The US isn't any quicker processing green card applications for people sponsored by employers. I'm told they are working on applications received in 2007.

I hope not. That would be a royal pain in the you know what.

So you think our ( well, actually my husband's. since I'm only a visitor ) Member of Parliament was lying to me or the Immigration office was lying to him when they that was normal and done that way for everyone?

Besides that, if that were the case, why would be get a letter saying they didn't need an interview? Certainly , if there was cause for concern on the first FBI clearance, they wouldn't be letting me go without an interview.