Six months after the 'new kit' was introduced - Discussion

[Classic Chucks]

Let's talk about the process six months after the new sponsorship package has been introduced on December 2016 for inland and outland spousal applications.

What are your observations and experiences?

What should be improved and what should have just been retained from the old package?

Are we seeing much faster timelines?

Really, anything and everything that you may think of about the new process, please kindly share them.

Thank you.

 

[canadianwoman]

The new package is simpler and easier to fill out, and also requires less evidence. I'm afraid, though, that with less evidence upfront, all this means is that people from 'difficult' countries, or who have red flags, will get a request for more evidence later on in the process, thus making their timeline longer.

 

[Classic Chucks]

The new package is simpler and easier to fill out, and also requires less evidence. I'm afraid, though, that with less evidence upfront, all this means is that people from 'difficult' countries, or who have red flags, will get a request for more evidence later on in the process, thus making their timeline longer.

I agree with your thoughts. Are we seeing more 'new kit' applicants having interviews?


My take:
I gotta say, they should have just retained the schedule A being submitted upfront. I don't understand the need to defer the submission, it just adds a month or so to an applicant's timeline.

They should also improve their online system. Applicants are also going nuts with the whole online glitch every time.

 

[Classic Chucks]

And one more thing, instead of returning the whole package after discovering a missing signature or a missing form, can't they just ask the applicant to submit the form? I know they aim to process faster those 'complete' packages, and part of that is to just send back incomplete packages.

 

[canadianwoman]

Yes, in the forums we have seen many more people than previously say that their applications were returned. I think this is one way the government can keep its promise of faster processing times: the promise only applies to complete applications, of course, so any little thing can cause them to send the application back. I also think this is one way they will deal with countries that used to have very long average processing times: now they want the average to be 12 months, but if an application does not have enough evidence, and the visa officer requests more, this application will not be counted as part of the average.
That said, I do think we will have to wait longer to see how everything is working out, especially for the visa offices that previously had long timelines. The government did hire more workers to process immigration applications, so maybe things will get quicker for everyone.

 

[RoamingSpirit]

Our application package was returned a month after submission due to our misinterpreting something in the checklist. It put back our processing by 3 months as we had to get additional documents.

I wrote to my MP stating how I felt it was extremely unfair that we get "punished" because of a bad process. She agreed and told me that a working group submitted a study to the government outlining a number of suggested changes to processes in order to innovate and streamline the processes.

It is here if anyone wants to take a look:

http://www.ourcommons.ca/DocumentViewer/en/42-1/CIMM/report-9

 

[Classic Chucks]

Our application package was returned a month after submission due to our misinterpreting something in the checklist. It put back our processing by 3 months as we had to get additional documents.

I wrote to my MP stating how I felt it was extremely unfair that we get "punished" because of a bad process. She agreed and told me that a working group submitted a study to the government outlining a number of suggested changes to processes in order to innovate and streamline the processes.

It is here if anyone wants to take a look:

http://www.ourcommons.ca/DocumentViewer/en/42-1/CIMM/report-9

So sorry to hear your experience. But that was a comprehensive study. I hope they will look at it and take it seriously.

 

[Classic Chucks]

Yes, in the forums we have seen many more people than previously say that their applications were returned. I think this is one way the government can keep its promise of faster processing times: the promise only applies to complete applications, of course, so any little thing can cause them to send the application back. I also think this is one way they will deal with countries that used to have very long average processing times: now they want the average to be 12 months, but if an application does not have enough evidence, and the visa officer requests more, this application will not be counted as part of the average.
That said, I do think we will have to wait longer to see how everything is working out, especially for the visa offices that previously had long timelines. The government did hire more workers to process immigration applications, so maybe things will get quicker for everyone.

Yeah, they did. But they seem to have hired incompetent ones. Some applications are being returned even though it was complete.

 

[canadianwoman]

I saw the ad for the new workers. They only needed grade 10. To become a foreign service officer (the Canadian visa officers who are making decisions on our files) is very difficult: one year there were 10,000 applicants, they hired less than 75, and you needed a Ph.D., a master's degree, a law degree, or a high level in Russian, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, or Arabic to be considered. Why there would be such a huge discrepancy in the requirements is beyond me.

 

[Classic Chucks]

I saw the ad for the new workers. They only needed grade 10. To become a foreign service officer (the Canadian visa officers who are making decisions on our files) is very difficult: one year there were 10,000 applicants, they hired less than 75, and you needed a Ph.D., a master's degree, a law degree, or a high level in Russian, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, or Arabic to be considered. Why there would be such a huge discrepancy in the requirements is beyond me.

Do you still have a way to see the ad for the new workers? If yes, may you please paste the link here? I would just like to see it too.
CIC should have raised the standards/requirements for the new workers. They treat it as if it's just an entry level job. The new workers seem so irresponsible and take no regards to the amount of time applicants are losing when they make such avoidable mistakes.

 

[canadianwoman]

I'll look for it, but I saw it in the fall.

 

[Classic Chucks]

I'll look for it, but I saw it in the fall.

Thanks! No worries though, if you can't see it. I'm just curious.

 

[spousalsponsee]

Went through the old system, and very glad I did.

I know people have said the new forms are 'easier' - I haven't done a complete dummy app to check, but the most complicated form was Schedule A which is still in there, so I don't see what's meant to be easier. The proof required is now clearer, but is also much more restrictive, so everything gained on one hand is lost on the other. And the sheer amount of back-and-forth! We applied common law so were asked for the declaration of CL union form towards the end by email, that was it. Everything else was mailed off at the beginning. Now looking at timelines there's about 4 rounds of mailing needed in each direction.

Spousal open work permits seem to be going faster (used to be 4 months, now often arriving in 2) for inland apps, and inland apps generally seem to have sped up a lot (some people getting in about 6-8 months instead of 2 years), but outland - some formerly fast visa offices have slowed to a crawl - only 1 person who applied in 2017 has been approved through Ottawa from London (and they were so early they were probably on old forms), that used to routinely take 3-4 months.

 

[Badi]

Hello All,
I found that processing time for out-land is much much faster than inland which "as promised by cic" should be the same (12 months). Plus the error of not receiving the schedule A and PCC request is causing people to loose months of processing time, specially for those who lives in quebec. I lost one month just waiting for a letter that ask me to apply for gov of quebec.

Another finding is that the way they send AOR is not fair, some people get it in 1 or 2 week other after 1 months.

the last thing i want to add is in my case they send both AOR to the PA !!! i called cic and they said we can assure you that the email on file for PA and Sponsor is right and you should have gotten separate emails. But in my case the PA got both email.

LOTS OF TECHNICAL Issues. and we are the ones paying for it

 

[Jiro]

The new package is simpler and easier to fill out, and also requires less evidence. I'm afraid, though, that with less evidence upfront, all this means is that people from 'difficult' countries, or who have red flags, will get a request for more evidence later on in the process, thus making their timeline longer.

I think this is the intent of the change. The majority of applicants will not have red flags, and are not from 'difficult' countries as you put them. So while those folks requiring clarification or are from countries that require a little extra due diligence which will take a longer time, the bulk of the applicants should have a smoother and faster process.

MyCIC glitches are another issue altogether. Not testing their IT infrastructure for something as important as PCC/Sch A request is shocking.