Refusal Letter:
My study permit for my MASc program has been refused by IRCC with the following reasons:
• I am not satisfied that you will leave Canada at the end of your stay, as stipulated in subsection 216(1) of the IRPR, based on your family ties in Canada and in your country of residence.
• I am not satisfied that you will leave Canada at the end of your stay, as stipulated in subsection 216(1) of the IRPR, based on the purpose of your visit.
• I am not satisfied that you will leave Canada at the end of your stay, as stipulated in subsection 216(1) of the IRPR, based on your current employment situation.
You are welcome to reapply if you feel that you can respond to these concerns and can demonstrate that your situation meets the requirements. All new applications must be accompanied by a new processing fee.
Next Action and advice Needed:
I believe the reasons to the refusal are very flimsy and want to reapply as soon as possible.
I am working and i showed enough explanation and documentary proofs (pay slips, contract letter and introductory letter from my employer).
I also explained and showed proof of my family ties in my home country, Ghana.(marriage certificates, birth certificates of my 4 children, documents of my 4-bedrooms apartment and 3 cars).
Some of my cousins are Canadian citizens but I don't depend on them in anyway. How do i explain and convince IRCC in this regard?
I believe i also explained myself well in my LOE (5 pages) about my intentions and the reason to study. I also explained the reason as to my long academic gap very well
I would be grateful if you guys can advice me on what to do and some strong explanation I can give to IRCC in this regard.
I also want to know if I need to concentrate on only the 3 reasons to the refusal in the re-application or I need to consider all possible scenarios like the financial proofs that they did not have any problems with in my previous application. This is because they have actually stated in the refusal letter to reapply if I can respond strongly to the 3 concerns they raised.
My study permit for my MASc program has been refused by IRCC with the following reasons:
• I am not satisfied that you will leave Canada at the end of your stay, as stipulated in subsection 216(1) of the IRPR, based on your family ties in Canada and in your country of residence.
• I am not satisfied that you will leave Canada at the end of your stay, as stipulated in subsection 216(1) of the IRPR, based on the purpose of your visit.
• I am not satisfied that you will leave Canada at the end of your stay, as stipulated in subsection 216(1) of the IRPR, based on your current employment situation.
You are welcome to reapply if you feel that you can respond to these concerns and can demonstrate that your situation meets the requirements. All new applications must be accompanied by a new processing fee.
Next Action and advice Needed:
I believe the reasons to the refusal are very flimsy and want to reapply as soon as possible.
I am working and i showed enough explanation and documentary proofs (pay slips, contract letter and introductory letter from my employer).
I also explained and showed proof of my family ties in my home country, Ghana.(marriage certificates, birth certificates of my 4 children, documents of my 4-bedrooms apartment and 3 cars).
Some of my cousins are Canadian citizens but I don't depend on them in anyway. How do i explain and convince IRCC in this regard?
I believe i also explained myself well in my LOE (5 pages) about my intentions and the reason to study. I also explained the reason as to my long academic gap very well
I would be grateful if you guys can advice me on what to do and some strong explanation I can give to IRCC in this regard.
I also want to know if I need to concentrate on only the 3 reasons to the refusal in the re-application or I need to consider all possible scenarios like the financial proofs that they did not have any problems with in my previous application. This is because they have actually stated in the refusal letter to reapply if I can respond strongly to the 3 concerns they raised.
