one-year pilot OWP for spouses and common-law partners

[queenpies]

If cbsa doesn't try to remove before the initial assessment is done and I get temporary residency, will I be fine?
Or will I fail already in the initial assessment since I do not have implied status?

I think the rule changed in September or October 2014. If you applied before this date, the old rule applies, and you are okay as long as you have an eligible sponsor.

 

[Ponga]

If cbsa doesn't try to remove before the initial assessment is done and I get temporary residency, will I be fine?
Or will I fail already in the initial assessment since I do not have implied status?

Prior to September 2014, the Inland Guide stated that legal status was not a requirement, providing the applicant had an eligible sponsor.

Since you applied in May 2014, your lack of status would not prevent your PR from being approved. However, the guide also warned that those in Canada without status could be removed at anytime. Many here believe that unless you do something to draw attention to yourself, you should be ok until you reach AIP (first stage approval), which for you could be ~ August October (based on the current processing times).

For you, having AIP would not necessarily give you temporary residency status, but it would be better than having no status.

 

[rhcohen2014]

If cbsa doesn't try to remove before the initial assessment is done and I get temporary residency, will I be fine?
Or will I fail already in the initial assessment since I do not have implied status?

I don't think anyone can answer this question for you, as it is dependant on the interpretation of your file by the visa officer. history on this forum generally dictates as long as the applicant doesn't get deported, then there's no negative affect on the file. We have also seen situations where those without status are reported to CBSA, and CBSA gets CIC to work WITH the applicant to get their file processed so the person does not get removed from Canada. I believe BlueViolet is one applicant dealing with this issue. We have not heard of an update from her in some time though. You are not alone. At this point, all you can do is keep your head down and wait for the application to get processed. otherwise, the other *option* would be to withdraw your inland application, apply outland, leave canada and attempt re-entry in order to fix your status, and keep your fingers crossed CBSA doesn't figure out your overstay.

 

[Ponga]

I think the rule changed in September or October 2014. If you applied before this date, the old rule applies, and you are okay as long as you have an eligible sponsor.

CIC hasn't officially changed this policy [yet], but since they did update the language in the Inland Guide, they must be planning to implement it...maybe?

The old `policy' was enacted in February 2005 and until late 2011 CBSA was `looking the other way' because they had an Administrative Deferral of Removal' policy in place to work with the CIC policy. Apparently, the CBSA policy ended in November 2011, although there's been nothing published to reflect this.

 

[MapleLeafMan]

Prior to September 2014, the Inland Guide stated that legal status was not a requirement, providing the applicant had an eligible sponsor.

Since you applied in May 2014, your lack of status would not prevent your PR from being approved. However, the guide also warned that those in Canada without status could be removed at anytime. Many here believe that unless you do something to draw attention to yourself, you should be ok until you reach AIP (first stage approval), which for you could be ~ August (based on the current processing times).

For you, having AIP would not necessarily give you temporary residency status, but it would be better than having no status.

So even after the first stage, initial assessment is done, I wouldn't automatically get temporary status and then can apply for a work permit?

 

[queenpies]

CIC hasn't officially changed this policy [yet], but since they did update the language in the Inland Guide, they must be planning to implement it...maybe?

The old `policy' was enacted in February 2005 and until late 2011 CBSA was `looking the other way' because they had an Administrative Deferral of Removal' policy in place to work with the CIC policy. Apparently, the CBSA policy ended in November 2011, although there's been nothing published to reflect this.

Ya. That's what I am saying. That's what the guide says now. If the guide says applicants have to maintain legal status, then applicants have to follow them. I really think following the guide is better than going to a representative. Sighs. After his AIP then he can apply for OPW.

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/helpcentre/answer.asp?q=177&t=17

 

[Ponga]

So even after the first stage, initial assessment is done, I wouldn't automatically get temporary status and then can apply for a work permit?

Yes, you can apply for an OWP after AIP, but I believe it will have something on it that states that it does not confer temporary residency status (or similar). It would be a sort of psuedo status and you would not be removed because of this. It would certainly be a good thing!

 

[MapleLeafMan]

Thank you everyone.

So if I understand this correct, the risk that this will affect my application negative is very small? They won't way "you were illegal from May 2014 to August 2015 and therefore we will deny your application"? The risk is if I don't manage to stay under the radar until I get the AIP? Stay under the radar in other words stay out of trouble, right? I already own a car here, own property, have a license and etc...this won't really make it harder for me to stay under the radar in this case, right?

 

[rhcohen2014]

Thank you everyone.

So if I understand this correct, the risk that this will affect my application negative is very small? They won't way "you were illegal from May 2014 to August 2015 and therefore we will deny your application"? The risk is if I don't manage to stay under the radar until I get the AIP? Stay under the radar in other words stay out of trouble, right? I already own a car here, own property, have a license and etc...this won't really make it harder for me to stay under the radar in this case, right?

stay under the radar as in don't get into trouble and don't tell ANYONE you are out of status. just 1 phone call from any person can trigger an investigation!

i don't think owning a car, property or having a license matters. your status is not normally topic of conversation for these items, and i don't think any of them are going to come asking.

 

[Ponga]

Thank you everyone.

So if I understand this correct, the risk that this will affect my application negative is very small? They won't way "you were illegal from May 2014 to August 2015 and therefore we will deny your application"? The risk is if I don't manage to stay under the radar until I get the AIP? Stay under the radar in other words stay out of trouble, right? I already own a car here, own property, have a license and etc...this won't really make it harder for me to stay under the radar in this case, right?

In all seriousness, you need to ask your lawyer why she screwed up!

Telling you you had implied status all this time needs to be reported to someone that can at least investigate this firm and, more importantly, prevent them from doing it again!

 

[rhcohen2014]

Telling you you had implied status all this time needs to be reported to someone that can at least investigate this firm and, more importantly, prevent them from doing it again!

seriously. there is no excuse for these people NOT knowing the rules when they are being paid for representation! it's so ridiculous. i would go as far as reporting them to cic (assuming they are classified as a representative by CIC) AND whatever the licensing agency is for attorneys in canada! talk about misrepresentation!!!

 

[MapleLeafMan]

In all seriousness, you need to ask your lawyer why she screwed up!

Telling you you had implied status all this time needs to be reported to someone that can at least investigate this firm and, more importantly, prevent them from doing it again!

Yes it makes no sense. All of you people in here seem to knowwhat you're talking about,
at the same time an experienced lawyer at one of the supposedly best immigration law firms in the country should know what they are talking about. It's not once, it's not twice, like I said, I've been told this multiple times, many of them in writing.

But again, most likely my application will be fine as a long as I stay under the radar? My application shouldn't be denied because of this? This is my entire world we are talking about and I feel very upset and worried now. still struggling to believe that this has happened. I hired one of the best lawfirms around for a reason.

 

[Ponga]

seriously. there is no excuse for these people NOT knowing the rules when they are being paid for representation! it's so ridiculous. i would go as far as reporting them to cic (assuming they are classified as a representative by CIC) AND whatever the licensing agency is for attorneys in canada! talk about misrepresentation!!!

Psst...don't forget about that shift key on your keyboard.

Using it will make you look even smrter smarter! LOL!

 

[Ponga]

Yes it makes no sense. All of you people in here seem to think what you're talking about,
at the same time an experienced lawyer at one of the supposedly best immigration law firms in the country should know what they are talking about. It's not once, it's not twice, like I said, I've been told this multiple times, many of them in writing.

But again, most likely my application will be fine as a long as I stay under the radar? My application shouldn't be denied because of this? This is my entire world we are talking about and I feel very upset and worried now. still struggling to believe that this has happened. I hired one of the best lawfirms around for a reason.

Don't worry too much about this. Use this new information and move forward.

 

[MapleLeafMan]

Don't worry too much about this. Use this new information and move forward.

Also, my lawyer has told me that it's fine that we don't have anything from immigration saying that they received our application...lawyer said its common that you don't hear from immigration until initial assessment is done and not to worry.

Correct?