Spousal sponsorship

[kau]

Hi Guys, Could you please help me with Question Number 3. of IMM0008; Indicate the total number of family members included in your application. This includes yourself and any family members, regardless of whether they intend to accompany you to Canada or not?

I am (PR Holder) sponsoring my Husband (Newly Married)

Do we need to include my Father-In Law, Mother In-law, Brother-In Law and his wife and Daughter?

Thanks

 

[MilesAway]

Hi Guys, Could you please help me with Question Number 3. of IMM0008; Indicate the total number of family members included in your application. This includes yourself and any family members, regardless of whether they intend to accompany you to Canada or not?

I am (PR Holder) sponsoring my Husband (Newly Married)

Do we need to include my Father-In Law, Mother In-law, Brother-In Law and his wife and Daughter?

Thanks

Your family members include your spouse or common-law partner, your dependent children and any children that are their dependent children.

Are you married to your in-laws? Are they your children? If not, then you do not include them there.

 

[canadausa#11]

Thank you so much for this post. I am after some advice regarding my PR application. A few facts that will hopefully help to explain my situation, as everything on the CIC site seems quite confusing and I'm hoping that I've followed the correct process!

- I'm a New Zealand citizen
- My fiancé is Canadian
- We met in New Zealand back in 2004 but only got together in the beginning of 2014, we got engaged in November of 2014 before going travelling together for a year. We arrived in Canada at the beginning of September 2015 (I currently have a 1 year open work permit under IEC).
- We are getting married in July of this year.

About 3 weeks ago I sent my PR application along with an application to extend my work permit to CIC in Mississauga. I have applied for PR under the common-law spousal sponsorship class (but obviously provided information about our upcoming wedding), I found information saying that I needed to send my application for a work permit extension in paper along with my PR application - so that's what I've done. Was this the correct process?

Now that this is all said and done, how do I find out about the status of my application? I'm worried that because the processing time for PR is so long that they won't even see that I've applied for a work permit extension and will get booted out come September.

Any advice would be much appreciated.

Thanks in advance.

I definitely would have applied outland. Good chance Ottawa or Sydney have the entire app done by September.

 

[Rob_TO]

Hi, I need advice again.. Me and my common-law husband who is PR has been living together for more than 2 years now. He just landed last December 2015 and, honest mistake, he did not inform Cic that he has a common-law wife. We went to a lawyer because we are planning to submit spousal sponsorship. I read from this forum about paragraph 117 and discussed it with the lawyer. What he said confused me, he said its ok to declare in the application that we haved lived together since 2013 because we did not declare it yet in any government form.
He said that in the form Statutory Declaration as common-law which is included in the application, we will just state the date that we have been cohabiting since jan. 2015 only, so by the time he landed, we were still not common-law. I told him but we are already living together since 2013. He said it doesnt matter because unless you declare your common-law relationship, you are still not considered common-law. He said that we can just say that we are living together but not common-law because we are still not sure about the relationship.
Is this true? This is really confusing. I don't know if this is true or not coz i have been reading in this forum and that's not what i understand. Please correct me if im wrong.

If you are living with someone you are dating, then you are certainly "sure about the relationship". If you weren't sure, you wouldn't be living together. This is how CIC will view it.

As others mentioned, your lawyer is telling you to commit misrepresentation and lie on your app, or he is just a very bad lawyer and really clueless about how common-law status actually works. I would not engage any further with him either way.
The only way CIC would even possibly consider the time spent living together as not qualifying for common-law, is if you were only roommates and not dating at all. Of course this is not true though.

I say `probably', because some people think that if he renounces his own PR and starts over, he can, but...that's yet to be proven.

What's there to prove? It's perfectly fine to do as per every single rule from CIC. The ban on a non-declared spouse only apples to family class apps, not to worker, economic, etc apps. With a brand new PR app under another stream, the entire reason for the ban in the first place is completely irrelevant as everyone would need to pass medicals again. The hard part is the sponsor needs to abandon their PR status and life in Canada for a while, and actually re-qualify again for PR.

Only potential risk of this other than not qualifying for PR again, is if CIC decides to view the original leaving of spouse off app as misrepresentation and complicates it to get PR again in the future. Though in most economic stream apps, the spouses are usually added with much less burden of proof and scrutiny vs a family class app.

 

[Fawzietrim]

Hey fellow members:
In the checklist for the sponsored spouse they are asking for proofs of relationhship.
I attached proofs in a separate envelope. Do i include also proof in the envelope of sponsorep spouse or that is enough?

 

[Aquakitty]

Hey fellow members:
In the checklist for the sponsored spouse they are asking for proofs of relationhship.
I attached proofs in a separate envelope. Do i include also proof in the envelope of sponsorep spouse or that is enough?

A separate envelope is fine, CIC doesn't actually separate the applications, they are done in order so you can use the same proof and photocopies for both applications.

 

[Fawzietrim]

A separate envelope is fine, CIC doesn't actually separate the applications, they are done in order so you can use the same proof and photocopies for both applications.

Thank you so much and one more question our chat long is in arabic do I need to translate that its more that 500 pages

 

[TANMEX]

Thank you so much and one more question our chat long is in arabic do I need to translate that its more that 500 pages

You don't need to send 500 pages , they will shred most of them at Mississauga without even looking at them , you can translate some of them yourself to English or Francais .

 

[Ponga]

What's there to prove? It's perfectly fine to do as per every single rule from CIC. The ban on a non-declared spouse only apples to family class apps, not to worker, economic, etc apps. With a brand new PR app under another stream, the entire reason for the ban in the first place is completely irrelevant as everyone would need to pass medicals again. The hard part is the sponsor needs to abandon their PR status and life in Canada for a while, and actually re-qualify again for PR.

Only potential risk of this other than not qualifying for PR again, is if CIC decides to view the original leaving of spouse off app as misrepresentation and complicates it to get PR again in the future. Though in most economic stream apps, the spouses are usually added with much less burden of proof and scrutiny vs a family class app.

The bottom line is that nobody [here] has any idea if this really works in the real world. Unless/until somebody provides evidence of someone doing this successfully, I'll remain pessimistic.

 

[Fawzietrim]

You don't need to send 500 pages , they will shred most of them at Mississauga without even looking at them , you can translate some of them yourself to English or Francais .

Regardless the number of pages are you sure that translation is a must?

 

[TANMEX]

Regardless the number of pages are you sure that translation is a must?

Yes I'm sure you must translate some of them to a language that a Canadian Immigration officer can understand ( Francais , Anglais ) , you can also include an explanation that you can translate more if they need .

 

[Aquakitty]

Regardless the number of pages are you sure that translation is a must?

TANMEX is right, 500 pages is far too much to send. Pick out a mix of chat logs from each month, showing various types of communication, even some arguments are good to put in there, whatever shows you have a real relationship. The unofficial docs like this you can self-translate, you just need the official documents translated by a certified translator.

 

[Fawzietrim]

TANMEX is right, 500 pages is far too much to send. Pick out a mix of chat logs from each month, showing various types of communication, even some arguments are good to put in there, whatever shows you have a real relationship. The unofficial docs like this you can self-translate, you just need the official documents translated by a certified translator.

Thank you all so much. You replies are appreciated

 

[kam_cool]

Can you please advise approximately how long it will take for my spousal visa application to be completed?

Application filed: March 20, 2015
Sponsor approval: May 22, 2015
CIC status: In process
Upfront medical was sent with the application.

Kindly advise how much longer can I expect to wait. The CIC website shows 17 month waiting period, so can expect to wait 6 more months or more?

Thank you.

 

[Mrschino]

Can you please advise approximately how long it will take for my spousal visa application to be completed?

Application filed: March 20, 2015
Sponsor approval: May 22, 2015
CIC status: In process
Upfront medical was sent with the application.

Kindly advise how much longer can I expect to wait. The CIC website shows 17 month waiting period, so can expect to wait 6 more months or more?

Thank you.

17 months includes time for sponsorship approval. Hopefully you are nearing the end, we have the same timeline and I am still waiting as well.