Living in Canada as a visitor. Marriage Sponsorship Questions

[Rob_TO]

I think immigration has to process the approval part faster within 60 days if I'm rights and then they back off , my husband is also out of status and I was considering applying Outland but have only seen one successful story of Outland out of status , so have changed my application to inland because from everything I read it's the safer route and you have protection. Hopefully a senior member can give someone input this is what I am under the impression of which is why I am choose inland instead now

CIC doesn't "have" to do anything. Yes there have been stories of out-of-status inland applicants having their stage 1 approval fast tracked and then CBSA backing off. However there have also been stories of out-of-status inland applicants being deported by CBSA and their PR app cancelled. There are no guarantees what will happen when you submit your PR app while being out of status.

 

[Zakmalik]

Wasn't the inland application designed to help those who are out of status? I understand they dony HAVE to do anything , just from what I have read there have been more success stories then non success stories , if I could as you a question . If the border decides you need to leave can you apply for H&C or you have no options after that ?

 

[Ponga]

Wasn't the inland application designed to help those who are out of status? I understand they dony HAVE to do anything , just from what I have read there have been more success stories then non success stories , if I could as you a question . If the border decides you need to leave can you apply for H&C or you have no options after that ?

I still have to wonder why CIC changed the language in the Inland Guide last September, stating that legal status is now required for those who wish to apply. The Guide was updated again since then and that new language remains.

Since the public policy that allowed a person without status to apply Inland was enacted in February 2005...and nothing has been published anywhere regarding the suspension of this policy...why did CIC make the change to the Guide?

If a person is removed, I believe that they can apply again under H&C, but the removal would make an already difficult case even bigger, IMHO.

 

[meatcasey]

While I appreciate all the help, I still haven't gotten any good straight answers through this thread or any other thread I've read. All I need is a straight answer to the following: Which option carries less risk for deportation, since I am staying illegally with no option to leave Canada? Applying outland, or inland along with an OWP app? One way or the other, I am applying for one and I need to know which is best for me.

 

[Zakmalik]

I would say inland there are more success cases if you are ordered to leave , but like everyone says it's not 100% , you could try contacting a lawyer they usually have free consultation, maybe try the ones who own this site

 

[meatcasey]

I would say inland there are more success cases if you are ordered to leave , but like everyone says it's not 100% , you could try contacting a lawyer they usually have free consultation, maybe try the ones who own this site

Okay, thank you. I'll consult a lawyer soon.

 

[Zakmalik]

I'll also be contacting a few lawyers since my husband is in the same situation as you if I find out sooner I will let you know

 

[Ponga]

The truth is...there is no straight answer.

Locate the ip08 document on CIC's website.

Start with page 41, near the bottom:
Applicant is inadmissible (lack of status inadmissibilities may be waived by the spousal policy)

Then, look at pages 53-54 to get a true definition of a person without status.

And finally, read this on page 57:

If it is determined that a sponsorship has been submitted, the officer will:
• Assess the applicant following normal procedures in IP2 and IP8 on the Spouse or Common-
law Partner in Canada class; and
• If it is determined that the applicant meets the other requirements of the Spouse or Common- law Partner in Canada class (a determination that the sponsor meets eligibility requirements, a bona fide relationship, and cohabitation with the sponsor), the requirement for the applicant to have valid immigration status (R124(b)) and the requirement not to be inadmissible for lack of status (A21(1) and R(72)(1)(e)(i)) is waived by A25 under this public policy.

Since CIC changed the language in the Inland Guide last September, that now says that a person must have legal status to apply...who knows what this really means, since IP8 has not been updated, removing this public policy.

While there are a few members that feel that an Outland application is an option, I suspect that the vast majority of those without status have chosen the Inland path, since the aforementioned language found in IP08, does not appear in any of the Outland processing manuals, AFAIK.

Lastly, submitting an OWP with an Inland application will not reduce the chances of a person without status being removed. There was a CBSA Administrative Deferral of Removal policy in place that worked in tandem with CIC's public policy, but that may have ended in November 2011 (according to at least two immigration lawyers), while others believe that CBSA is still `watching', without acting until they know if an applicant has been denied. This is detailed on page 59 of IP8 (section F).

 

[meatcasey]

If it is determined that a sponsorship has been submitted, the officer will:
• Assess the applicant following normal procedures in IP2 and IP8 on the Spouse or Common-
law Partner in Canada class; and
• If it is determined that the applicant meets the other requirements of the Spouse or Common- law Partner in Canada class (a determination that the sponsor meets eligibility requirements, a bona fide relationship, and cohabitation with the sponsor), the requirement for the applicant to have valid immigration status (R124(b)) and the requirement not to be inadmissible for lack of status (A21(1) and R(72)(1)(e)(i)) is waived by A25 under this public policy.

As long as that quote is still in the document, I feel confident that the policy should still be in effect. I'll ensure that it remains in the document whenever I send in my application.

 

[Ponga]

I would agree with you, since IP8 would seem to carry more `weight', than the language change to the Inland Guide itself.
IP8 was last updated in October 2006, so that language does in fact still remain.

But...I wonder why CIC made the change last September? The guide was updated again this year and that new language remains.

 

[Zakmalik]

It's very confusing , since there's different things being send In different parts of the applications forms guides Etc, so it says that if the sponsor is approved it MAY wave the lack of status part? Could you tell me when they are doing removal orders if they take family of the person removed into consideration.? Like the persons children here in canada

 

[Zakmalik]

As long as that quote is still in the document, I feel confident that the policy should still be in effect. I'll ensure that it remains in the document whenever I send in my application.

. i would suggest applying for it soon before anytbing changes on any guide or form
Etc ,

 

[Ponga]

Yes, it does seem rather passive doesn't it. Unfortunately, there have been persons removed that had family in Canada...even infant children, but that does NOT mean that they do that for everyone. Some people have been told to report to the CBSA on a monthly basis and are allowed to remain in Canada, pending the completion of their application. Again, I have no idea how they make this determination.


I don't know how CBSA determines who is removed and who is not, but it's probably based on things like:

1. If a person is found to be a danger to the people of Canada.

2. Was CBSA even aware that the person was out of status prior to CIC receiving their spousal sponsorship application? This could be if the person had been refused an extension, or a work or study permit, was a failed refugee claimant, etc.

3. If a person from a visa exempt country has overstayed, CBSA may not have known about that person prior to CIC inputting their information from the application. At that point, CBSA may just keep an eye of the application until there has been a decision either way.


Since a person needs to disclose the fact that they are out of status in the application, as soon as CIC enters the data into their system (or simply scans the bar code on the form), they will know. Do they immediately inform CBSA, in case they were not aware already? Who knows.

 

[Ponga]

. i would suggest applying for it soon before anytbing changes on any guide or form
Etc ,

Agreed! Time really is an enemy now, so you [both] need to do something ASAP!

 

[Zakmalik]

Yes, it does seem rather passive doesn't it. Unfortunately, there have been persons removed that had family in Canada...even infant children, but that does NOT mean that they do that for everyone. Some people have been told to report to the CBSA on a monthly basis and are allowed to remain in Canada, pending the completion of their application. Again, I have no idea how they make this determination.


I don't know how CBSA determines who is removed and who is not, but it's probably based on things like:

1. If a person is found to be a danger to the people of Canada.

2. Was CBSA even aware that the person was out of status prior to CIC receiving their spousal sponsorship application? This could be if the person had been refused an extension, or a work or study permit, was a failed refugee claimant, etc.

3. If a person from a visa exempt country has overstayed, CBSA may not have known about that person prior to CIC inputting their information from the application. At that point, CBSA may just keep an eye of the application until there has been a decision either way.


Since a person needs to disclose the fact that they are out of status in the application, as soon as CIC enters the data into their system (or simply scans the bar code on the form), they will know. Do they immediately inform CBSA, in case they were not aware already? Who knows.

. It gets me worried because my husband and I have 2 children together and the reason for his overstay was because he didn't want to leave his children. Not sure if they even care about children in any of there choices, I'll have to send my application and hope for the best ,