INLAND APPLICATIONS 2013

[Ponga]

Thank you. I thought the same. I thought it was okay to cross the border by land, but not leave the country through an airport.

Not true.

You can travel across a land border after you have received your CoPR and have in fact `landed' as a PR and are awaiting your PR card.

Prior to you actually landing as a PR...it's still a risk.

[edit]

If you are from a visa-exempt country and have never had any negative dealings with CBSA, your chances of being refused are probably low, but again...there is no guarantee.

Good luck!!!

 

[Ponga]

Just a follow-up question for seanbeck1:

I just read your first post, from Aug 2013, where you indicate that you sent your OWP about a month AFTER you sent your Inland sponsorship application. Are you in fact covered under implied status, because most people are of the belief that the OWP must be sent WITH the Inland application.

In any event, I do believe that your implied status would end the minute you cross the border into the US.

 

[Sept 11 2013]

If you are okay with AIP and do not need DM right away maybe wait. It's possible that they extend the medicals for you since you they recently expired and bc of the delays.

As Bruneian said if money is not an issue you could redo them. It's up to you to weigh the pros/cons of it all.
[/quote

I'm August applicant still waiting for AIp.

 

[seanbeck1]

Just a follow-up question for seanbeck1:

I just read your first post, from Aug 2013, where you indicate that you sent your OWP about a month AFTER you sent your Inland sponsorship application. Are you in fact covered under implied status, because most people are of the belief that the OWP must be sent WITH the Inland application.

In any event, I do believe that your implied status would end the minute you cross the border into the US.

Im under the impression that I was considered 'implied status' when I had applied for my PR but not received my OWP. I now have my Open Work Permit, so would I not be considered as having a working status in Canada?

 

[Ponga]

More than likely, you are under implied status, even though you sent your OWP after you sent your Inland application, because you were still IN status at that time.

Because your OWP was issued solely because of your Inland AIP, it might not been seen the same to CBSA as other OWP...Especially if it states that it is NOT to be used for re-entry!

And just to clarify; it's CBSA that you would encounter at the border NOT CIC. No matter what the person at CIC told you (which you stated was not a definitive answer anyway), it would be the sole discretion of the CBSA officer as to whether or not you are allowed back into Canada.

 

[5hr3wd]

Thank you woodyc, ACS, bruneian, RRSweet and Daizey!

It took me an year minus 10 days to hear from them but it came after all. Yours will too!

Best wishes to all of you who are still waiting..

 

[crepes]

It's been 4 months since they started on stage 2 (background checks, etc)- do they ask for medical exams soon? Any idea if I should just go ahead and get it done hoping that'll speed things up?

This is my application timeline:

-We received your application for permanent residence on July 8, 2013.
-We started processing your application on March 7, 2014.
-Open work permit also received in March 2014

 

[Linden]

Thank you. I thought the same. I thought it was okay to cross the border by land, but not leave the country through an airport.

I believe the OWP that came with your AIP is not a travel document. It might even say on your permit that's it's not for re-entry purposes.

What is was your status before you applied?

I recently left with my partner(applicant) to Europe for a couple weeks and we still do not have AIP. She is currently on a visitor status and from a visa exempt country. When we landed in Montreal the border officer didn't ask many questions all he was concerned about was my partner hadn't overstayed her visa(visitor). No problem.

Are you from a visa exempt country? If so you'll most likely be allowed to re-enter. Be sure you're able to prove you did not overstay your original visa. Also there is something in the CBSA manuals that says if a person has AIP and there are no issues such as previous criminal history the border agent should admit the person. Though as Ponga said there are no guarantees.

Have you checked with CBSA? They are the ones that will decide if you'll be allowed to re-enter. CIC will not be helpful.

 

[computergeek]

While the rules are different here regarding DUI, the husband didn't follow the law of the respective country by drinking and driving even though it is more strict than ours. He is going to have a hard time convincing CIC that he didn't "really" break the law of his country because ours has a bit looser rule over his country. Why should he be above the law in his country just because he is applying for PR in Canada.

Because the legal standard for immigration purposes is whether or not the equivalent charge is an indictable offence under Canadian law. While we can moralize about the appropriate nature of specific behaviour, I'm merely explaining the legal standard that is supposed to be applied under Canadian law.

With that said, the onus will be on the applicant to show that the foreign criminal conviction would not have achieved the legal requirements of Canada. Court records showing a BAC of 0.06, for example, would indeed leave CIC with no legal basis for determining the person is criminally inadmissible.

Another example. Although it is an unrelated subject. The age of consent in canada is 16. But it differs around the world. What if a person from Cyprus was charged with underage sex with a 16 year old minor even though the child consented, where the legal age of consent is 17. Does this mean CiC can ignore the charge because our law says age of consent is 16.

The point I am making is that while charges may not be the same if it was done in Canada, the charges are still serious charges to convince CIC otherwise.

Let me give you another example: suppose someone were convicted of apostasy and sentenced to 10 years in prison. There is no equivalent crime in Canada. Using your argument, the fact it is not a criminal offence in Canada wouldn't matter.

What I will say (and have said before) is that determining criminal inadmissibility can be surprisingly complex. Someone with a criminality issue is best served with an immigration attorney experienced in criminal inadmissibility.

But in the end, if the OP was convinced with a BAC below the legal limit in Canada, the conviction would not cause them to be criminally inadmissible given current Canadian immigration law.

 

[Daizey]

Im not sure what the previous person means, as you dont have DM yet! However from my own experience, I crossed the border on a pgwp back in january, from niagara to buffalo! Coming back in was a breeze, gave our passports, and if I recall correctly the officer didnt even ask for the pgwp (valud visa on the passpor5 however) ! Its is my understanding that land crossing is not regulated as much as coming in through a commercial carrier! And let me tell u I've been asked some stupid questions at pearson! If I recall correctly you dont even need a valid visa to come back in through land crossing (as long as ur a temp resident, student or worker), someon3 correct me if im wrong!
However in ur case im not sure what status the owp that comes with AIP gives you! Its best if you call CBSA, they would know best!

What I meant was, before the whole process is done, (DM, landed, whatever) it's always risky...either by land or air. I do agree, going by land is easier, just because they are a bit more lax than customs at the airport, but I wouldn't bet my whole process on if the border guard was in a good mood that day or not. Some people have exceptions, but if you apply INLAND you're really not supposed to be going anywhere before it's done. It's one of the main reasons some people apply outland while still living in Canada, just so they can come and go as they please. You're not supposed to if you've applied inland. Believe me, I'm 2 hours away from the border of my home country, I would LOVE to go visit. I just wouldn't risk it, just because there's the smallest chance that something would happen. But it's up to you!

 

[screech339]

Because the legal standard for immigration purposes is whether or not the equivalent charge is an indictable offence under Canadian law. While we can moralize about the appropriate nature of specific behaviour, I'm merely explaining the legal standard that is supposed to be applied under Canadian law.

With that said, the onus will be on the applicant to show that the foreign criminal conviction would not have achieved the legal requirements of Canada. Court records showing a BAC of 0.06, for example, would indeed leave CIC with no legal basis for determining the person is criminally inadmissible.

Let me give you another example: suppose someone were convicted of apostasy and sentenced to 10 years in prison. There is no equivalent crime in Canada. Using your argument, the fact it is not a criminal offence in Canada wouldn't matter.

What I will say (and have said before) is that determining criminal inadmissibility can be surprisingly complex. Someone with a criminality issue is best served with an immigration attorney experienced in criminal inadmissibility.

But in the end, if the OP was convinced with a BAC below the legal limit in Canada, the conviction would not cause them to be criminally inadmissible given current Canadian immigration law.

I agree that the onus is on the applicant to provide proof of it not applying to canadian laws. However the example you gave is not a good example. There is no laws on apostasy in Canada at all thus no comparison to make. You are comparing apples to oranges in comparing laws that exist outside Canada to laws that don't exist in Canada. No apples to apples comparisons.

However there are worldwide laws regarding underage sex and drinking and driving in examples I have provided. This way I can argue about the merit of it. Comparing apples to apples in examples. I would not provide samples of foreign convictions or laws that we don't even have Canadian laws on.

 

[ACS]

I agree that the onus is on the applicant to provide proof of it not applying to canada laws. However the example you gave is not a good example. There is no laws on apostasy in Canada at all thus no comparison to make.

However there are laws for underage sex and laws for drinking and driving in examples I have provided. I wouldn't provide samples of foreign convictions that we don't even have laws on.

How about crossing the Border illegally? There is no conviction time for that here in Canada as far as I could find, just deportation?

 

[carteryang]

Hi, have you received the email for AIP? If you did receive that, a letter asking for medical exam should also be sent to you.

It's been 4 months since they started on stage 2 (background checks, etc)- do they ask for medical exams soon? Any idea if I should just go ahead and get it done hoping that'll speed things up?

This is my application timeline:

-We received your application for permanent residence on July 8, 2013.
-We started processing your application on March 7, 2014.
-Open work permit also received in March 2014

 

[bruneian]

I believe the OWP that came with your AIP is not a travel document. It might even say on your permit that's it's not for re-entry purposes.

What is was your status before you applied?

I recently left with my partner(applicant) to Europe for a couple weeks and we still do not have AIP. She is currently on a visitor status and from a visa exempt country. When we landed in Montreal the border officer didn't ask many questions all he was concerned about was my partner hadn't overstayed her visa(visitor). No problem.

Are you from a visa exempt country? If so you'll most likely be allowed to re-enter. Be sure you're able to prove you did not overstay your original visa. Also there is something in the CBSA manuals that says if a person has AIP and there are no issues such as previous criminal history the border agent should admit the person. Though as Ponga said there are no guarantees.

Have you checked with CBSA? They are the ones that will decide if you'll be allowed to re-enter. CIC will not be helpful.

just to add, we went to south east asia 4 months ago for a vacation. I am from a visa exempt country but i am NOT visa exempt (long story short i am stateless). It was before we'd received AIP. The CBSA officer at the airport only asked for my PGWP and we are free to go. I also applied for a TRV that is a sticker on my travel doc for non-visa exempt people. I did this months before we leave. we want to travel again soon, but will probably wait for my PR card this time.

 

[carteryang]

Hi Bruneian,

Do you know how to push CIC to make decision after AIP and medical received?

just to add, we went to south east asia 4 months ago for a vacation. I am from a visa exempt country but i am NOT visa exempt (long story short i am stateless). It was before we'd received AIP. The CBSA officer at the airport only asked for my PGWP and we are free to go. I also applied for a TRV that is a sticker on my travel doc for non-visa exempt people. I did this months before we leave. we want to travel again soon, but will probably wait for my PR card this time.