Runaway Grooms sues wife and government and immigration

[HoneyBird]

With all due respect, please do not derail my thread.
This is a serious discussion.

 

[visita44]

Sorry about that.. But the Answer is for all that is interested is THE PORT MANN Bridge in the Greater Vancouver Area, BC...

Have a great Day Everybody..

Yes, I agree that the groom is also liable. He knew what was goin on at the very start and he agreed to be a part of it , so he is also INVOLVED to a fraud and in my opinion, he deserve to be deported.

 

[CharlieD10]

What irritates me most about stories like these is the way these "he said/she said" debacles become news. Pretty soon, lots of people have an opinion about Family Class immigration that is anything but flattering, and it gives the impression that these cases are among the majority and that is why they make the news. From CIC's own statistics it should be obvious that they are in the minority, but no-one quotes these statistics, what the media are interested in is the sensationalist and salacious aspects of the stories.

Worse, when they become frivolous lawsuits and/or refugee claims, these people take their dirty linen one step further and clog up already slow immigration processes and waste resources that could be dedicated elsewhere.

The attitude of the husband in the first case and the wife in the second is contemptible. They obviously feel entitled to something, and I would like to know exactly what that is. What does either of them think Canada owes them? They are not the first people to enter into fraudulent marriages, (if we take their side), and they certainly won't be the last. How does this become CIC's problem to compensate them for their spouse's lack of morals/ethics/whatever? The fact that immigration is a part of their relationship is no-one's responsibility but their own. As my husband often says, "Suck it up, buttercup"!

He had right up until the moment before he signed whatever papers makes the marriage legal to back out, it is ridiculous to assert that he had no idea she was confined to a wheelchair until the day of the wedding and thus was unable to back out before that point. And I am fairly sure she did not arrive from the airport to the temple or wherever they were married dressed in all her wedding finery for the ceremony, so he had plenty of time to change his mind before then.

For her to claim she deserves some kind of refugee protection because she is an "abandoned wife" is nonsense. Jason Kenney is right, no-one should get on a plane bound for a foreign country without first verifying they have status to do so. Especially should you not do so when you married a complete stranger whose feelings you are not sure of. Where is the commitment to you that you are supposed to rely on? Again, it is her husband's problem to keep her in Canada, not Canada's. At no time did Canada guarantee her anything, it was her husband she made vows with. That he proved untrue to his word does not obligate Canada to uphold his promises, marital or otherwise. So Canada does not owe her anything because he backed out of their arrangement, whatever it was.

That there are a high percentage of fraudulent marriages coming out of Southeast Asia, especially India and China, and yet the two visa offices processing these applications consistently has better timelines than any other says a great deal about what countries Canada places priority on when it comes to accepting immigrants. In the time it takes the visa office I am going through, for example, to process 80% of its applications (17 months), an application going through New Delhi can be received, processed and rejected, appealed and be upheld or over-turned! That's right, someone from New Delhi could get TWO shots at a PR in the time it could take me to have just one. There's a serious imbalance in there somewhere.

Stories like these, overall they just annoy me. They trivialise the struggles of real long-distance couples to be reunited, and waste time and resources better used elsewhere. These are just attention-seeking ploys, and it is a crying shame they are entertained by the media, lawyers and other advocates, when so many more deserving causes are out there.

 

[Kedeisha]

What irritates me most about stories like these is the way these "he said/she said" debacles become news. Pretty soon, lots of people have an opinion about Family Class immigration that is anything but flattering, and it gives the impression that these cases are among the majority and that is why they make the news. From CIC's own statistics it should be obvious that they are in the minority, but no-one quotes these statistics, what the media are interested in is the sensationalist and salacious aspects of the stories.

Worse, when they become frivolous lawsuits and/or refugee claims, these people take their dirty linen one step further and clog up already slow immigration processes and waste resources that could be dedicated elsewhere.

The attitude of the husband in the first case and the wife in the second is contemptible. They obviously feel entitled to something, and I would like to know exactly what that is. What does either of them think Canada owes them? They are not the first people to enter into fraudulent marriages, (if we take their side), and they certainly won't be the last. How does this become CIC's problem to compensate them for their spouse's lack of morals/ethics/whatever? The fact that immigration is a part of their relationship is no-one's responsibility but their own. As my husband often says, "Suck it up, buttercup"!

He had right up until the moment before he signed whatever papers makes the marriage legal to back out, it is ridiculous to assert that he had no idea she was confined to a wheelchair until the day of the wedding and thus was unable to back out before that point. And I am fairly sure she did not arrive from the airport to the temple or wherever they were married dressed in all her wedding finery for the ceremony, so he had plenty of time to change his mind before then.

For her to claim she deserves some kind of refugee protection because she is an "abandoned wife" is nonsense. Jason Kenney is right, no-one should get on a plane bound for a foreign country without first verifying they have status to do so. Especially should you not do so when you married a complete stranger whose feelings you are not sure of. Where is the commitment to you that you are supposed to rely on? Again, it is her husband's problem to keep her in Canada, not Canada's. At no time did Canada guarantee her anything, it was her husband she made vows with. That he proved untrue to his word does not obligate Canada to uphold his promises, marital or otherwise. So Canada does not owe her anything because he backed out of their arrangement, whatever it was.

That there are a high percentage of fraudulent marriages coming out of Southeast Asia, especially India and China, and yet the two visa offices processing these applications consistently has better timelines than any other says a great deal about what countries Canada places priority on when it comes to accepting immigrants. In the time it takes the visa office I am going through, for example, to process 80% of its applications (17 months), an application going through New Delhi can be received, processed and rejected, appealed and be upheld or over-turned! That's right, someone from New Delhi could get TWO shots at a PR in the time it could take me to have just one. There's a serious imbalance in there somewhere.
Stories like these, overall they just annoy me. They trivialise the struggles of real long-distance couples to be reunited, and waste time and resources better used elsewhere. These are just attention-seeking ploys, and it is a crying shame they are entertained by the media, lawyers and other advocates, when so many more deserving causes are out there.

Well said but I doubt there will be any changes forth coming as I read in an article the reason those countries are normally given priority is they have a better chance of integrating into a tax paying society than others coming from other countries which i strongly disagree with.

 

[pinklady]

CharlieD10, I completely agree.

 

[Kedeisha]

http://oppenheimer.mcgill.ca/Who-doesn-t-get-into-Canada

that is the article I am referring too and the part i just spoke about

To Richard Kurland, the Vancouver-based immigration lawyer who dug it up, the document confirmed “what everybody in the business has known for a long time.” For years, the government has been gathering data on the performance of newcomers and their children based on ethnicity, he notes, and while immigration officials deny they use information to identify the best countries from which to recruit, the numbers tell a different story. Since 1999, China and India have been the top two source countries for immigrants to Canada, averaging about 60,000 landings per year, while the number coming from the Caribbean has fallen sharply. Immigration from the West Indies had fallen 45 per cent below levels seen in the early 1990s, according to figures compiled by Statistics Canada, when more than 16,000 from that region were entering the country annually.

Edit to add:

And these days, equipped with new legislative powers, the government is able to pick and choose more aggressively than ever. Bill C-50, passed in late 2008, allows the minister to delay the processing of applications from specific missions abroad in order to speed those from others, and so far the results have been stark. The average wait time for someone wishing to bring a spouse into the country through Kingston, Jamaica has ballooned to 15 months, fully three times the processing time in 2006. A similar application lodged in New Delhi takes just six months.

It would be simplistic to call this profiling. China and India are better represented in Canada’s intake statistics, a senior government official told Maclean’s, because they are rich in skilled, educated people willing to emigrate—not because of ethnic traits, real or imagined: “It’s a matter of basic supply and demand.” As for the memo, a spokeswoman for Citizenship and Immigration Canada would say only that it reflects the department’s ongoing concern for groups “experiencing less positive outcomes from an immigration, settlement and a multiculturalism perspective.”

 

[CharlieD10]

Further notes from that article:

"But now, as a free-trading nation in a knowledge economy, he says, we would “like to recruit only the perfect designer immigrants,” and that means leaning on the narrow band of countries that have them in surplus. It also means pinching the flow from countries where the education system is lacking, or money is scarce.

It’s a far cry from our fondest self-image as a haven for the lowly, who yearn for a better life. Years ago, during a cross-country train trip, Maclean’s journalist Rae Corelli summoned a romantic image of Canada’s French and English founders leaving “a key under the mat for dreamers from other lands.” The key is still there, of course. But as we weigh an uncertain future, we’re getting a lot more picky about whom we invite to use it.

Pardon me for not being Chinese or Indian (oh wait, my great-grandfather was an Indian migrant to Jamaica, does that count?). Apparently, unless I am either of those, it doesn't count that I am genuinely married to my husband, have a professional qualification, a Masters-level education, no criminal record and I actually do speak English as my first language. The assumption, because I am from Jamaica, is that I am desperate to get out of the country by whatever means, poorly-educated and unlikely to integrate well into Canadian society. How is this NOT racial profiling? So much for being assessed on my individual merits!

 

[Baloo]

How is this NOT racial profiling? So much for being assessed on my individual merits!

It is not right. But will it change, I doubt it.

 

[confusednscared]

They just don't like Caribbean people because of the so called "bad" impression we leave on the Government of Canada. But, put 500 Indians, Chinese or Sri Lankans on a boat and ship them off to Canada and see how much of a "great" impression that leaves on the Government of Canada. I must say they are very proud of breaking and breaching their own laws to accommodate illegal activities.

Bureaucracy will always be ignorant

 

[Kedeisha]

I don't see an end in sight and the reason they give as to why some offices take longer than others is ridiculous why not have a standard timeframe across the board especially for Spousal/Dependent child stream. If I was going thru Kenya my application would take 31 mths on average as opposed to some offices, yes fraudulent documents are easily attainable in that region but as we can see the people from the "desired" countries are doing worse than others from red-flag countries.

 

[CharlieD10]

The current system just goes to show that when you extend favouritism, you inevitably end up with people from those "favoured" nations/region thinking that they can and should be able to bypass the system. That is why the two couples illustrated in the articles Honeybird posted felt safe enough to go public with their shady stories, because they are assured of a hearing ear in the media and before Immigration authorities based solely on being from preferred nations.

This lopsided policy has simply bitten Canada on the proverbial keister by forcing them to enforce more measures to combat marriages of convenience and commit more resources to the Appeals section because when these couples are rejected they do not feel they have been caught out, rather they are affronted that their special/preferred status has not be recognised and they appeal their absurdly fraudulent marriages and stories until they get the outcome they feel entitled to.

If Canada really wanted to cherry-pick immigrants, they would extend everyone the same priority, seeing as everyone has to pay the same fees. This absurd policy has done nothing more than solve one "problem" and create several more complicated, more expensive, more extensive ones.

And I don't expect it to change. The very nature of a bureaucracy is that change is unwelcome and next to impossible to implement.

 

[Danny4450]

How is this NOT racial profiling? So much for being assessed on my individual merits!

I feel your pain man. I have the same issue with this system. I am sponsoring my wife from Pakistan which is right beside India and China. The case processing time was 9 months in 2009 but now it is 23 months

Apparently, CIC has reduced the spousal sponsorship Visa quota in several countries due to the same reasoning resulting an increase in the case processing time.

 

[KG2011]

This is one of theose subjects that are touchy and only a person with first hand knowledge can truly comment with any degree of accuracy. If you have no understanding of the culture and what really goes on with these arranged marriages you are not in a position to comment one way or another. Yes there are many fraudulent marriages and they do take advantage of the system but again there are some cases which are genuine and where the grooms go to their home countries and get married and then mistreat their wives because of insufficient dowry or such issues. In this case if the woman in the story was telling the truth and she was not aware that the husband had changed his mind she will indeed have a miserable life if she returns home as a divorced woman so even though Canada does not owe her anything. The husband should not get away scott free. But who determines these things?? All I am saying is have a little compassion guys!! Don't judge too quickly.

 

[CharlieD10]

I stand by what I said. She married HIM, if he proves false to his marital vows for whatever reason, and if because of HIS poor behaviour she is put in an untenable position in their culture and her country, that is THEIR business. The fact that he happens to be Canadian is by the way, it is not germane to the issues they have in their marriage, so she cannot claim any kind of recompense from Canada in the way of permission to remain in the country when she has no status.

I don't think he should get off scott-free, I never said anything of the kind. If she wants compensation, or wishes to pursue some kind of action against him for defrauding or misleading her or putting her at risk of public censure because of their culture, then she should pursue it where they formed the contract he is defaulting on, i.e. the country where they got married, the place where she is facing cultural backlash because she chose to marry him, the place where she has legal standing and status and rights.

My point remains, none of their dirty laundry has anything to do with Canada, they are wasting time and resources better spent elsewhere airing this PRIVATE matter in this fashion. Their going public with matters that are usually dealt with in private between the families comes off as seeking sympathy and a way into Canada through some kind of backdoor. Their issues have nothing to do with Immigration, and everything to do with people marrying for the wrong reasons.

My compassion is reserved for people with REAL problems.

 

[suva]

if they apply the system as UK , Australia and USA it will be helpful for everybody. i think the proposed 2 yrs conditional visa will be a good idea. but most of the sponsored spouses want PR as soon as they land.