Please help with extension question

[Loveforcanada]

Hello! My current girlfriend came to Canada from Russia in May on a visitors visa to attend some yoga workshops. We met there, (yoga retreat), and we decided to have a relationship shortly after. We have been together since. Her visa expires Sept. 30th, and we have read she should apply immediately for an extension. We both really like each other and wish to apply after one year of living together for common law sponsorship.

My question is weather this is a good reason to apply for the extension? Can she ask for 8 months extension so we qualify for common law sponsorship? Has anyone heard of extensions longer than 6 months? If we apply for 6 months and get approved, what are the chances of getting approved for another 2 months a second time?

Thank you for your time! Ive searched for similar threads, but haven't found many

 

[davek1979]

You can apply for as much time as you want if they will give it to her or not is another question. I would apply for six months at a time. My wife and I applied and got approved twice for visa extensions of six months. I recall seeing people who applied for and got 12 month extensions.

 

[dukhi]

You can apply for as much time as you want if they will give it to her or not is another question. I would apply for six months at a time. My wife and I applied and got approved twice for visa extensions of six months. I recall seeing people who applied for and got 12 month extensions.

what doc do we need for applying extension?

 

[O_guy]

what doc do we need for applying extension?

The information you are looking for is clearly stated on http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/information/applications/visitor.asp

I think you will have to show to CIC there is enough money for her to stay in Canada for another 6 months. If she has the money and can show bank statement, that is certainly the easiest way to go. However, if she will be living with you and you are the one with the employment, then send in a Letter of Employment showing your salary with the application.

I don't think it is difficult to get the extension. However, there is a problem with your plan. In one of the forms required to extend the visa, she would have to indicate she doesn't have spouse and she is not in a common law relationship. But 8 months from now, you will seek sponsorship as your common law. CIC will not allow this. CIC will most likely reject your common-law sponsorship because they will say she was dishonest in her visa extension application.

 

[Loveforcanada]

and if she says we are in a common law relationship?

Ive read on here that some people get granted extensions based on exploring relationship...

Any chance you can clarify?

 

[maina]

its nt very healthy to take extensions beyond visa limit.. can cause prob in future

 

[dukhi]

its nt very healthy to take extensions beyond visa limit.. can cause prob in future

by visa limit you mean visa expiry date?

 

[canuck_in_uk]

Hello! My current girlfriend came to Canada from Russia in May on a visitors visa to attend some yoga workshops. We met there, (yoga retreat), and we decided to have a relationship shortly after. We have been together since. Her visa expires Sept. 30th, and we have read she should apply immediately for an extension. We both really like each other and wish to apply after one year of living together for common law sponsorship.

My question is weather this is a good reason to apply for the extension? Can she ask for 8 months extension so we qualify for common law sponsorship? Has anyone heard of extensions longer than 6 months? If we apply for 6 months and get approved, what are the chances of getting approved for another 2 months a second time?

As davek1979 said, she can apply for as much time as she wants, provided she can show proof of funds and a valid reason. There are people on here who have applied for and received 14 month extensions. Wanting to become common-law is usually seen as a valid reason, though the only cases I've seen on here in that situation have had a total relationship time longer than yours.

Given that you've known each other less than 4 months, I suggest she ask for the standard 6 months, saying she wants to explore the relationship. Then she can apply again just before that expires (apply for 6 months, not 2) saying that you guys are committed and want to become common-law.

I don't think it is difficult to get the extension. However, there is a problem with your plan. In one of the forms required to extend the visa, she would have to indicate she doesn't have spouse and she is not in a common law relationship. But 8 months from now, you will seek sponsorship as your common law. CIC will not allow this. CIC will most likely reject your common-law sponsorship because they will say she was dishonest in her visa extension application.

This is wrong. She ISN'T in a common-law relationship right now and won't be when she applies to extend her visitor status. Her marital status will be "Single" until after the 1 year mark of living together when it becomes "Common-law". CIC will have no issues with this.

 

[O_guy]

As davek1979 said, she can apply for as much time as she wants, provided she can show proof of funds and a valid reason. There are people on here who have applied for and received 14 month extensions. Wanting to become common-law is usually seen as a valid reason, though the only cases I've seen on here in that situation have had a total relationship time longer than yours.

Given that you've known each other less than 4 months, I suggest she ask for the standard 6 months, saying she wants to explore the relationship. Then she can apply again just before that expires (apply for 6 months, not 2) saying that you guys are committed and want to become common-law.

This is wrong. She ISN'T in a common-law relationship right now and won't be when she applies to extend her visitor status. Her marital status will be "Single" until after the 1 year mark of living together when it becomes "Common-law". CIC will have no issues with this.

Before you tell me I'm wrong, actually understand my comment. Of course CIC would have problem with someone who claims to be single today and then applies for common-law sponsorship 8 months from now. Common-law status takes at least a year in the eyes of CIC.

 

[canuck_in_uk]

Before you tell me I'm wrong, actually understand my comment. Of course CIC would have problem with someone who claims to be single today and then applies for common-law sponsorship 8 months from now. Common-law status takes at least a year in the eyes of CIC.

I think you are misunderstanding common-law.

They aren't common-law during that first year; a couple enters into a common-law relationship the day that they have lived together for a year. Until they hit that 1 year mark, they are still SINGLE to CIC, even though they are a couple and living together.

For example, if she applied for a visa extension on their 363rd day of living together, she would still need to put single; they have not yet entered into a legally recognized common-law relationship. At 366 days of living together, she could submit a common-law sponsorship application. There is nothing wrong with this, as it complies with CIC and the legal definition of common-law.

 

[O_guy]

I think you are misunderstanding common-law.

They aren't common-law during that first year; a couple enters into a common-law relationship the day that they have lived together for a year. Until they hit that 1 year mark, they are still SINGLE to CIC, even though they are a couple and living together.

For example, if she applied for a visa extension on their 363rd day of living together, she would still need to put single; they have not yet entered into a legally recognized common-law relationship. At 366 days of living together, she could submit a common-law sponsorship application. There is nothing wrong with this, as it complies with CIC and the legal definition of common-law.

I understand your point. However, do you have any idea how many foreigners used Canadian citizens by entering into relationships just to get PR? Do a Google search and you will see several complaints, some of which have been on the newspapers. This is why there is a new law saying if you get a PR as a result of Spouse or Common-law sponsorship, you must live with your Canadian spouse for 2 years or you will lose that PR. This rule went into affect on October 25, 2012. My point is that there is strong possibility of CIC rejecting Loveforcanada's common-law sponsorship 8 months from now because they will think she is using him to get the PR. After all, this is a woman who came here as tourist, extended her TRV, and then claims she is in a year long common-law relationship with a Canadian to stay permanently. CIC will not make it that easy.

Loveforcanada, keep in mind that if you are denied in-land spouse or common-law sponsorship, there is no appeal process.

 

[canuck_in_uk]

I understand your point. However, do you have any idea how many foreigners used Canadian citizens by entering into relationships just to get PR? Do a Google search and you will see several complaints, some of which have been on the newspapers. This is why there is a new law saying if you get a PR as a result of Spouse or Common-law sponsorship, you must live with your Canadian spouse for 2 years or you will lose that PR. This rule went into affect on October 25, 2012. My point is that there is strong possibility of CIC rejecting Loveforcanada's common-law sponsorship 8 months from now because they will think she is using him to get the PR. After all, this is a woman who came here as tourist, extended her TRV, and then claims she is in a year long common-law relationship with a Canadian to stay permanently. CIC will not make it that easy.

Loveforcanada, keep in mind that if you are denied in-land spouse or common-law sponsorship, there is no appeal process.

I am well aware of the stats and and of the Conditional PR rule. However, I disagree that there is "strong possibility of CIC rejecting" their app. She can't just "claim she is in a year long common-law relationship"; CIC requires definitive proof of living together the entire time. Provided they have strong proof of a genuine relationship and proof that they have lived together for a year and qualify as common-law, there won't be much of an issue for CIC.

If they are denied inland, they can always reapply outland.

 

[O_guy]

I am well aware of the stats and and of the Conditional PR rule. However, I disagree that there is "strong possibility of CIC rejecting" their app. She can't just "claim she is in a year long common-law relationship"; CIC requires definitive proof of living together the entire time. Provided they have strong proof of a genuine relationship and proof that they have lived together for a year and qualify as common-law, there won't be much of an issue for CIC.

If they are denied inland, they can always reapply outland.

First of all, you are assuming too much. How can they proof they have been together for a year?

Secondly, you are very wrong when you said, "If they are denied inland, they can always reapply outland." Since their relationship started in Canada and they claim they have been living together in Canada for a year, there is no basis for applying "outland". Inland and outland have different set of requirements, you cannot just interchange them and you can certainly not apply for one after the other was denied. People who don't understand the process abuse it.

 

[canuck_in_uk]

First of all, you are assuming too much. How can they proof they have been together for a year?

Secondly, you are very wrong when you said, "If they are denied inland, they can always reapply outland." Since their relationship started in Canada and they claim they have been living together in Canada for a year, there is no basis for applying "outland". Inland and outland have different set of requirements, you cannot just interchange them and you can certainly not apply for one after the other was denied. People who don't understand the process abuse it.

I'm assuming too much?? Do you know anything about this process??

First, ALL COMMON-LAW COUPLES have to definitively prove to CIC they have lived together for at least a year and have a genuine relationship. That is the whole basis of the application; if they can't prove that, they don't qualify. There are many types of evidence that can be used to prove this.

Second, they DO NOT have to be outside Canada or have started their relationship outside Canada to apply outland. There are many, many people who met in Canada and live in Canada but have applied outland with no issues. There has also been couples on these forums denied inland; the applicant (and usually the sponsor) moved back to their own country, applied again OUTLAND and received approval.

You can MOST DEFINITELY reapply outland after being denied inland.

 

[Need to be with Hubby]

First of all, you are assuming too much. How can they proof they have been together for a year?

Secondly, you are very wrong when you said, "If they are denied inland, they can always reapply outland." Since their relationship started in Canada and they claim they have been living together in Canada for a year, there is no basis for applying "outland". Inland and outland have different set of requirements, you cannot just interchange them and you can certainly not apply for one after the other was denied. People who don't understand the process abuse it.

They can prove same way me and lots more are proving, such as photos with family and friends and of them together movies tickets with dates. Things they do together and people they know saying yes they know them as a couple for that period of time. In every rule also there are exceptions, don't be so quick to say it won't work in there favor. Yes they can reapply out land once they have more proof of the relationship. Mostly likely if CIC denied her they gonna want her to leave Canada and that is where outland application comes in to play. Basically there in one general rule for cic granting PR, extensions whatever. Genuine relationship that can be proven and sponsor able to provide that goes for both in and out land.