Same here.PNP oultand AOR 12th june....In Ip2 since 26th june..No update since then..anyone in the same boat?
PNP-O
AOR: 12th June 2018
MEP/IP1: 29th June 2018
IP2: 16th July 2018
Same here.PNP oultand AOR 12th june....In Ip2 since 26th june..No update since then..anyone in the same boat?
Ah i missed that, Thanks!"This online service will be unavailable from 3:00 a.m. to 5:30 a.m. Eastern time, on Tuesday October 23, 2018, in order to perform system maintenance."
There is a scheduled maintenance today..hopefully it should be up in an hours time from now..Is the CIC Site down or is it just me?
I think I have an answer for your concern. If you closely look at my case analyst's note, you would see "R76: SELECTION CRITERIA - FSW POINTS/Funds" which is written as met. This means R76 includes both calculation of FSW points and Funds. If any one of them is not met then R76 will be review required. In your note, case analyst separately has written about FSW points (which is actually met) and Funds (which is review required). System must have not allowed him to write R76: FSW points met because other part of R76: Funds is review required. For this reason he wrote Review Required for your FSW points as well even though it seems you have met that already.
From this analysis, I think you have passed the eligibility but you are stuck on "review required" for funds. I suggest you to upload latest 6 months statements, bank letters and LOE explaining the whole situation as soon as possible via web form. This may help you to get PPR sooner than it may take if no actions are taken.
Good Luck!
Yes that’s correct. But if you look at the case you just commented on, where Eligibility was MET on pg2 but the case analyst’s notes revealed only a part of R76 was met and the other needed to be reviewed. Had both parts been met, Eligibility on pg2 would probably be Recommend PassedRecommend Passed, Met, Appears Met all are used interchangeably. They all mean same thing, and it is actually means Passed because Visa Officers usually go with this recommendation. If you have either of them in your notes that means your file is in queue for security checks or already security started. As soon as it comes good, you will receive PPR.
Hi,Hello,
I'm in the same boat review required for funds!!! Do you really think it is going to be ok to upload new proof o funds without being asked to do so??? Does we need to upload proof of funds dated on aor date and balance for previous 6 months or dated today and previous 6 months from now??
Regards
My time line is very similar to you. IP2 16 the October and Ghost appeared on 18th October . Hope that the ghost turns lucky...for us.Do ghost updates always yield positive results ?
Thanks, i too thought the same after looking at your notes. Some system limitations.I think I have an answer for your concern. If you closely look at my case analyst's note, you would see "R76: SELECTION CRITERIA - FSW POINTS/Funds" which is written as met. This means R76 includes both calculation of FSW points and Funds. If any one of them is not met then R76 will be review required. In your note, case analyst separately has written about FSW points (which is actually met) and Funds (which is review required). System must have not allowed him to write R76: FSW points met because other part of R76: Funds is review required. For this reason he wrote Review Required for your FSW points as well even though it seems you have met that already.
From this analysis, I think you have passed the eligibility but you are stuck on "review required" for funds. I suggest you to upload latest 6 months statements, bank letters and LOE explaining the whole situation as soon as possible via web form. This may help you to get PPR sooner than it may take if no actions are taken.
Good Luck!
If I was in your shoes, I would have provided them what ever documents i can to make my claim firm. Technically you should provide bank statement from 6 months prior to AOR till now. And provide a bank letter with latest 6 months average. Its up to you now to decide whether you should submit ADR without them to ask you or wait for their response first.Hello,
I'm in the same boat review required for funds!!! Do you really think it is going to be ok to upload new proof o funds without being asked to do so??? Does we need to upload proof of funds dated on aor date and balance for previous 6 months or dated today and previous 6 months from now??
Regards
Yes, prepared all by myself.hello, are you prepared all documents by yourself? i also work in Italy can i ask your some advice? thanks
If I was in your shoes, I would have provided them what ever documents i can to make my claim firm. Technically you should provide bank statement from 6 months prior to AOR till now. And provide a bank letter with latest 6 months average. Its up to you now to decide whether you should submit ADR without them to ask you or wait for their response first.
Good Luck!
Bank letter containing available balance and 6 months prior to aor balance and also monthly investments balance from a period higher than 6 months required period. That's was my mistake, they only need 6 months period, it was already shown on letter, there was no need to attach investments balances..Hi,
What did you show as pof? Did you recieve any communication from cic about this yet?