Inadmissiblity - PR application

[LifeDreamer]

In the US being arrested is the same as being charged, since police officers take up the role of prosecutors. But in any case, the question on schedule A relates to current or pending charges. There is one more question at the bottom which asks if you have been detained, your answer should be yes for this one.

There is one important thing to know, which is that you have *not* committed misrepresentation whichever way you answered IF you have included the FBI certificate showing the DUI arrest as part of your application. This is because you can argue that you misunderstood the questions (as apparently you do) and that the correct information can already be found elsewhere in the application. There is a court precedent for this, and you can appeal the misrepresentation ban if it occurs with a competent immigration lawyer who will take care of it for you.

The level of personal disclosure on Canadian immigration forms is very high. You are expected to detail any occurrences of being handcuffed or locked up at any time or place and for any reason, including instances where this has happened to you as a child. You are also expected to disclose your life history in detail (where you worked, studied, traveled, address history ..etc) not just for the last 10 years but for any period as the officer may choose.

 

[LifeDreamer]

furthermore, question 6b concerns subsequent convictions or pending charges and prosecutions, so no misrepresentation has been made.

You are correct in your answer, however this question appears in this form only in the schedule A document. The question on the EE form (if you have applied through Express Entry) asks if you have been arrested or charged, even if there were no subsequent convictions.

In any case, there is a question about being detained which you should have answered yes.

 

[Lynou]

If you answered No to Question 6j, then you committed misrepresentation. As explained above, arrested = detained.

yes I answered NO to question 6j but in the procedural fairness letter I received the agent raised question 6b

 

[Lynou]

You are correct in your answer, however this question appears in this form only in the schedule A document. The question on the EE form (if you have applied through Express Entry) asks if you have been arrested or charged, even if there were no subsequent convictions.

In any case, there is a question about being detained which you should have answered yes.

thank you for your reply. I apply in the category of skilled workers selected by Quebec and there is only Appendix A to fill. I was able to get a document from the prosecutor confirming that I was not charged for DUI I hope it will help me.

 

[LifeDreamer]

Can you put the procedural fairness letter you received here and remove your personal information or any numbers..etc.

 

[Lynou]

Can you put the procedural fairness letter you received here and remove your personal information or any numbers..etc.

This is in response to your application for permanent residence. Your application and all the documents submitted have been reviewed and it appears that you do not meet the immigration requirements in Canada. subsection 11 (1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act provides that a foreign national must, before entering Canada, apply to the officer for visas and other documents required by regulation. the officer may issue them on proof, following a check, that the alien is not inadmissible and complies with the Act. I am not satisfied that you meet the requirement of subsection 16 (1) of the IRPA, which states: 16 (1) An applicant under this Act shall respond truthfully to the questions put to it during the check,give the information and all relevant evidence and submit the required visas and documents. .specifically, I am concerned that you misrepresented your criminal history. In November 2016 you signed such a complete and accurate form, responding NO to the question of whether you had ever been the subject of criminal prosecution or accused of a crime in any country. in april 2017, you provided a US police certificate stating that you had been arrested and charged with driving while under the influence of alcohol. this misrepresentation is important because it directly concerns your criminal eligibility in Canada.
If you find that you are so disqualified, the ban will run for five years, in accordance with paragraph 40 (2) (a): 40 (1) Out of Prohibition for False Statements the following facts : a) directly or indirectly, doa misrepresentation of a material fact with respect to a relevant subject, or a reluctance to do so, that results in or risks causing an error in the application of this Act. I would like to give you an opportunity to respond to this information. You have 30 days from the date of this letter to provide additional information. please clearly indicate your file number in any correspondence you send.

 

[LifeDreamer]

The officer is being hard on you, I've never seen such an interpretation of the question to include past charges. However, from a purely grammatical perspective he or she is correct as they can breakdown the question into parts the last of which asks if you ever been a subject of any criminal proceedings.

The main problem here is not that you misunderstood the question, as many do, but rather that you omitted the DUI issue altogether from your application. If you had mentioned it anywhere or answered yes to the last question 6j or at least written an explanation letter you wouldn't have been accused with misrepresentation. Likewise If you had included the FBI police certificate, it can be argued that the information was already there.

There is still some hope with your application however, because it is you who brought the attention of the officer to the DUI through submitting the FBI certificate and because you included an explanation along with it, it should be viewed as correcting your past statements while the application is still under review, in which case the officer will typically ask you to fill out a new form of Schedule A. This is different from when, say, the officer discovers the DUI issue on his own before you brought it to light. It is a murky situation nevertheless and is highly dependent on officer discretion, but again, the officer is being hard on you. If you are serious about going to Canada, I would suggest that you seek the help of an attorney who will write a compelling response for you and appeal the ban if it was upheld. The process will likely drag on for a year or two, but is much better than being refused for misrepresentation. Keep in mind that the people who will review your appeal are likely to be much more lenient than the officer in question, and if you had to appeal to a judge I can almost guarantee you that the refusal will be overturned.

Again, I feel so sorry for how your application turned out since 2016 or earlier when you applied for a CSQ and then waited for processing till 2019 and are likely to wait a couple more years or refused altogether, even though you are eligible and have never committed DUI in the first place (as the breathalyzer test would show).

 

[Lynou]

The officer is being hard on you, I've never seen such an interpretation of the question to include past charges. However, from a purely grammatical perspective he or she is correct as they can breakdown the question into parts the last of which asks if you ever been a subject of any criminal proceedings.

The main problem here is not that you misunderstood the question, as many do, but rather that you omitted the DUI issue altogether from your application. If you had mentioned it anywhere or answered yes to the last question 6j or at least written an explanation letter you wouldn't have been accused with misrepresentation. Likewise If you had included the FBI police certificate, it can be argued that the information was already there.

There is still some hope with your application however, because it is you who brought the attention of the officer to the DUI through submitting the FBI certificate and because you included an explanation along with it, it should be viewed as correcting your past statements while the application is still under review, in which case the officer will typically ask you to fill out a new form of Schedule A. This is different from when, say, the officer discovers the DUI issue on his own before you brought it to light. It is a murky situation nevertheless and is highly dependent on officer discretion, but again, the officer is being hard on you. If you are serious about going to Canada, I would suggest that you seek the help of an attorney who will write a compelling response for you and appeal the ban if it was upheld. The process will likely drag on for a year or two, but is much better than being refused for misrepresentation. Keep in mind that the people who will review your appeal are likely to be much more lenient than the officer in question, and if you had to appeal to a judge I can almost guarantee you that the refusal will be overturned.

Again, I feel so sorry for how your application turned out since 2016 or earlier when you applied for a CSQ and then waited for processing till 2019 and are likely to wait a couple more years or refused altogether, even though you are eligible and have never committed DUI in the first place (as the breathalyzer test would show).

thank you for your compassion. I intend to go all the way and I have already hired an immigration lawyer who seems to be optimistic. I started the immigration process seven years ago I would not give up easily. also the prosecutor's office sent me a letter showing that I was never charged with DUI and that the arrest was made according to charge 23152 (a) which states that the breathalyzer result was less than 0.08

 

[Lynou]

I come back to the news, after responding to the procedural fairness letter, I received this week a request for a new police certificate. In your opinion is this a good sign.

 

[shalenabennie]

I come back to the news, after responding to the procedural fairness letter, I received this week a request for a new police certificate. In your opinion is this a good sign.

Getting adr after PFL is a good sign

 

[Lynou]

Getting adr after PFL is a good sign

I really hope so. Thank's for your reply.

 

[ruanp28]

I come back to the news, after responding to the procedural fairness letter, I received this week a request for a new police certificate. In your opinion is this a good sign.

It is in my opinion a good sign yes. Since you already received a PFL, if they were to reject your case you would have received a final rejection letter in stead of request for additional information. Just be truthful going forward.

 

[singleman]

ADR Advance Dispute Resolution is v good thing. The ADR process usually involves an hour long in-person meeting. A dispute resolution officer ( DRO ) conducts the ADR conference with the Minister's counsel (representing Citizenship and Immigration Canada) and the appellant and her or his counsel and assists them to agree to a settlement of the appeal.ALSO it can be ADDITIONAL DOC REQUEST

 

[shalenabennie]

ADR Advance Dispute Resolution is v good thing. The ADR process usually involves an hour long in-person meeting. A dispute resolution officer ( DRO ) conducts the ADR conference with the Minister's counsel (representing Citizenship and Immigration Canada) and the appellant and her or his counsel and assists them to agree to a settlement of the appeal.

ADR (additional documents request) she got after a PFL

 

[Lynou]

It is in my opinion a good sign yes. Since you already received a PFL, if they were to reject your case you would have received a final rejection letter in stead of request for additional information. Just be truthful going forward.

Thank's for your reply. knowing that I provided a police certificate when I filed my application. Now I’m being asked for a more recent one