I have a few queries about the Proof Of Funds required for an Express Entry application.
a) Do the funds have to be in a bank account or can they be invested in mutual funds and other financial instruments/insurance policies (not stocks)? Would statements from mutual funds and insurance companies be accepted as funds that can be liquidated on request?
b) Do the funds need to have been held for a certain period of time? I understand that statements are required for six months, but is it a requirement for the funds to have been held for that period of time or can a subsequent infusion of funds be acceptable (with an explanation), if required?
c) Somebody has advised us that in the case of a joint account (which is set to "Either or Survivor"), the applicant's name must be the first name on the account and that if it is the second name on the account, that account won't be taken into consideration for Proof Of Funds. That does not sound correct to me, as the second account-holder can access the funds on the same terms as the first. Is that advice correct?
d) I read on one of the other older threads (2010) on this forum that the assessment of Proof Of Funds is delegated to the various country offices for CIC. I presume that that is no longer the case and that there is at least a modicum of standardisation in the process. Is that presumption correct?
a) Do the funds have to be in a bank account or can they be invested in mutual funds and other financial instruments/insurance policies (not stocks)? Would statements from mutual funds and insurance companies be accepted as funds that can be liquidated on request?
b) Do the funds need to have been held for a certain period of time? I understand that statements are required for six months, but is it a requirement for the funds to have been held for that period of time or can a subsequent infusion of funds be acceptable (with an explanation), if required?
c) Somebody has advised us that in the case of a joint account (which is set to "Either or Survivor"), the applicant's name must be the first name on the account and that if it is the second name on the account, that account won't be taken into consideration for Proof Of Funds. That does not sound correct to me, as the second account-holder can access the funds on the same terms as the first. Is that advice correct?
d) I read on one of the other older threads (2010) on this forum that the assessment of Proof Of Funds is delegated to the various country offices for CIC. I presume that that is no longer the case and that there is at least a modicum of standardisation in the process. Is that presumption correct?