My husband just had an interview in Rabat

[rjessome]

Thank you, rjessome, for that!

I agree with you that #9 is the only issue for procedural fairness, but here's why I would press it: the timing of the events with regard to the RPRF request and the interview convocation. The applicant was requested/advised to pay the RPRF and only AFTER this had been done (payment made), was he advised that he was being convoked to an interview. Habibti may need to correct me (I can't trace her posts just now) but he was also advised about the interview within less than 30 days of the interview date, if memory serves me correctly, or if it doesn't then it was still somewhat "short" notice.

Something about things happening in that sequence just screams to me that someone didn't know what they were doing. Here's an applicant whose sponsor has deferred payment of the RPRF until a decision has been made by the visa office, you advise her to go ahead and pay it (thereby implying that you are making a favourable decision)...and then you yank him into a hostile interview shortly thereafter and threaten to deny his application? Nobody needs to be subjected to that. That's either poor processing or poor communication (#1). Whatever it is, they've caused this couple a lot of unnecessary distress, IMO.

Further, not only do you yank him into a hostile interview, but you also refuse to consider documents and information YOU requested he bring to make his case! (#3?)

Well, Habibti, it looks like you have to wait another 60 days before you know what's going on...I wish you guys all the best, and hope you hear nothing (regarding a denial, that is) and that your husband's processing just proceeds to his background checks. You guys hang in there.

Now that's much better! Reading through her old posts, reason #1 becomes stronger in my mind. Forget that he paid the fee, it's the other things said during the conversation that were misleading. And if her husband is refused, those are arguments she can make either by THEN requesting a reconsideration of the Program Manager or by appealing to the IAD.

One of her old posts says that they had previously sent in more information per their request. She doesn't state whether or not he was asked to bring anything additional to the interview as well.

If they are refused, Rules 1, 2 and 6 would be her best to use IMHO, depending upon the reasons for refusal (probably Section 4) and throw in #9 for good measure. Could be that the person who phoned him was locally engaged staff and not the VO deciding. Still, it's CIC's responsibility to ensure that communication is accurate. Of course, admissibility issues are a different ballgame.

 

[ddobro2]

Exactly, I don't think the applicant party should be expected to respect the rules of procedural fairness to the letter if the visa office can't do the same.

From seeing the two viewpoints on the matter, I personally would agree that having this lack of procedural fairness defense in one's back pocket (up one's sleeve?) *in the event* of any refusal letter, whether one citing section 4 (bad faith) or inadmissability on security grounds, is a wise thing to do. I didn't know that she had already been asked to pay, and paid, the landing fee. The security-check post interview issue I could kind of understand, but I completely agree that doing a major clearance check like that after having already requested RPRF is not how they should be processing.

Further, not only do you yank him into a hostile interview, but you also refuse to consider documents and information YOU requested he bring to make his case! (#3?)

 

[Habibti]

Thank you, rjessome, for that!

I agree with you that #9 is the only issue for procedural fairness, but here's why I would press it: the timing of the events with regard to the RPRF request and the interview convocation. The applicant was requested/advised to pay the RPRF and only AFTER this had been done (payment made), was he advised that he was being convoked to an interview. Habibti may need to correct me (I can't trace her posts just now) but he was also advised about the interview within less than 30 days of the interview date, if memory serves me correctly, or if it doesn't then it was still somewhat "short" notice.

Something about things happening in that sequence just screams to me that someone didn't know what they were doing. Here's an applicant whose sponsor has deferred payment of the RPRF until a decision has been made by the visa office, you advise her to go ahead and pay it (thereby implying that you are making a favourable decision)...and then you yank him into a hostile interview shortly thereafter and threaten to deny his application? Nobody needs to be subjected to that. That's either poor processing or poor communication (#1). Whatever it is, they've caused this couple a lot of unnecessary distress, IMO.

Further, not only do you yank him into a hostile interview, but you also refuse to consider documents and information YOU requested he bring to make his case! (#3?)

Well, Habibti, it looks like you have to wait another 60 days before you know what's going on...I wish you guys all the best, and hope you hear nothing (regarding a denial, that is) and that your husband's processing just proceeds to his background checks. You guys hang in there.

Thank you to all of you! I am really grateful! Despite my distress, I am happy to receive your recommendations and knowledge. It is quite confusing, so I will print everything you posted here and study here at home. My husband received phone call and email on August 26. He was told he would have interview on September 12. Yes, that was short notice.

 

[patopato]

Thank you, rjessome, for that!

I agree with you that #9 is the only issue for procedural fairness, but here's why I would press it: the timing of the events with regard to the RPRF request and the interview convocation. The applicant was requested/advised to pay the RPRF and only AFTER this had been done (payment made), was he advised that he was being convoked to an interview. Habibti may need to correct me (I can't trace her posts just now) but he was also advised about the interview within less than 30 days of the interview date, if memory serves me correctly, or if it doesn't then it was still somewhat "short" notice.

Something about things happening in that sequence just screams to me that someone didn't know what they were doing. Here's an applicant whose sponsor has deferred payment of the RPRF until a decision has been made by the visa office, you advise her to go ahead and pay it (thereby implying that you are making a favourable decision)...and then you yank him into a hostile interview shortly thereafter and threaten to deny his application? Nobody needs to be subjected to that. That's either poor processing or poor communication (#1). Whatever it is, they've caused this couple a lot of unnecessary distress, IMO.

Further, not only do you yank him into a hostile interview, but you also refuse to consider documents and information YOU requested he bring to make his case! (#3?)

Well, Habibti, it looks like you have to wait another 60 days before you know what's going on...I wish you guys all the best, and hope you hear nothing (regarding a denial, that is) and that your husband's processing just proceeds to his background checks. You guys hang in there.

I am new in this thread. But I see that you guys have so much information. I am sponsoring my husband from Tunisia and he had his interview in April and they requested we pay the RPRF in July so I did so and now they request he re-do his medical since it expired last month. They never told him if he is accepted or refuse. Does anybody know if it is going good or he might still be refused.Thank you!!

 

[Kedeisha]

based on the request for RPRF and re-meds take it as a good sign as they wouldnt request those without approving this is based on trends Habibti case is not normal as they made her and her husband do things that looked positive only to throw them a curve ball think positive

 

[Habibti]

I talked to my husband tonight. He told me something weird... well, I don't know if it is odd. They did not ask for his national identity card and his passport when he entered the visa office.

He also told me that he feels his chances are 80% he will get visa. The young woman seemed pleased and convinced with his answers.

I am still upset she refused to take or look at my boarding passes, our emails, our pictures, etc. that he brought along for the interview. He asked to have back our pictures, our letters, our postcards, etc. that we attached to our application in February but the lady said they still needed them.

My husband told her (without being asked) that if we are refused, I will visit him whenever I can and we will appeal. She asked him why don't I move to Morocco? He told her I cannot do that because of my mortgage, my work and my son. He said he talked more than she talked. During that time, she was typing on her computer.

She told him it takes 4 to 5 months to do the security checks and he asked her very politely if they could do them as fast as they can as his medicals will expire the first week of January. He also told her he was impatient to be in Canada with me so he can help me. He repeated a few times how much we suffer to be away from each other.

Another weird thing... Half an hour before my husband had his interview, I woke up my heart beating hard and fast (it was 4:00 am my time). And I heard a visa officer (a man) say to me: "Five months!". I really thought today was deliverance day! Now I will spend the next few months in a state of anxiety and wondering what will happen to us. My husband regrets not have written down the name of the woman who called him in June to tell him chances were he was going to Canada with me this summer!

 

[locolynn]

My husband received phone call and email on August 26. He was told he would have interview on September 12. Yes, that was short notice.

We have received an interview request With as little as 24 hours notice. 2 weeks is plenty of notice. While I think there are some confusing aspects, I think you may want to order your CAIPS and cool your jets for a bit. The offices rarely appreciate being called to the carpet and doing so will no doubt delay the application. Just keep a log of the activities (just in case), order your CAIPS and see what comes of it.

Seriously, I have been dealing with Rabat for four years now...you don't want to go in guns blazing. Work with them. They respond much better (though not a whole lot better ;/ )

Lynn

 

[Habibti]

We have received an interview request With as little as 24 hours notice. 2 weeks is plenty of notice. While I think there are some confusing aspects, I think you may want to order your CAIPS and cool your jets for a bit. The offices rarely appreciate being called to the carpet and doing so will no doubt delay the application. Just keep a log of the activities (just in case), order your CAIPS and see what comes of it.

Seriously, I have been dealing with Rabat for four years now...you don't want to go in guns blazing. Work with them. They respond much better (though not a whole lot better ;/ )

Lynn

Thanks! Definitely I will order these CAIPS notes!

 

[suva]

Another weird thing... Half an hour before my husband had his interview, I woke up my heart beating hard and fast (it was 4:00 am my time). And I heard a visa officer (a man) say to me: "Five months!".

thats good sign...... your inner voice can never go wrong... good luck dear

 

[ddobro2]

While I completely agree with advice that one should preserve one's own sanity during this grueling and emotional process, I think that 7abibti's case seems to be getting into some particularly thorny procedural and legal issues, seeing as how even experts in this forum are not completely in agreement about them. So it would be right to be concerned.

Aside from the RPRF issue, what I personally would keep in mind is this: according to CIC's own policies, an appeal to the Immigration and Appeal Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board can take place if Rabat's refusal is based on unconvincing evidence of the genuineness of the relationship, for example, but cannot be allowed if the application is refused "because your family member is not admissible for security reasons, for human rights violations, or for serious criminality." Obviously I note that because she said they brought up the security check during the interview but perhaps that is not too uncommon.

Now, I'm going to pray that everything will work out just fine, and that one day 7abibti will look back on this adventure with humor.

 

[Habibti]

While I completely agree with advice that one should preserve one's own sanity during this grueling and emotional process, I think that 7abibti's case seems to be getting into some particularly thorny procedural and legal issues, seeing as how even experts in this forum are not completely in agreement about them. So it would be right to be concerned.

Aside from the RPRF issue, what I personally would keep in mind is this: according to CIC's own policies, an appeal to the Immigration and Appeal Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board can take place if Rabat's refusal is based on unconvincing evidence of the genuineness of the relationship, for example, but cannot be allowed if the application is refused "because your family member is not admissible for security reasons, for human rights violations, or for serious criminality." Obviously I note that because she said they brought up the security check during the interview but perhaps that is not too uncommon.

Now, I'm going to pray that everything will work out just fine, and that one day 7abibti will look back on this adventure with humor.

Thank you ddobro2 But it was my understanding that once they ask for the RPRF, it means they believe the relationship is genuine!

 

[locolynn]

While I completely agree with advice that one should preserve one's own sanity during this grueling and emotional process, I think that 7abibti's case seems to be getting into some particularly thorny procedural and legal issues, seeing as how even experts in this forum are not completely in agreement about them. So it would be right to be concerned.

Definitely she should get her ducks in a row and be keeping a log of all communications. But I am cautioning jumping the gun on anything. Let them make their decision, then do what is required. Going after them BEFORE they've even made a decision - just doesn't make sense.

With all the confusion they could call next week!

Habibti - I hope all this confusion falls in your favour and you and you honey ate together soon!!

Lynn

 

[Habibti]

Thank you Lynn for your good wishes

Questions! My husband told me he was told by the officer that the checks will be done in Canada. How is it possible? He never left Morocco! Do you think the checks will be done quickly as him and his family did nothing wrong, he was never involved in politics or military life, never travelled, was never married before, lived at the same address since childhood?

 

[ddobro2]

Oh, by the way, nice picture @Kedeisha. Congrats too

 

[Kedeisha]

Oh, by the way, nice picture @ Kedeisha. Congrats too

Thank u