The situation:
In the initial statement provided with the TRV application on the 23rd of december 2024, my spouse stated that he had been approved for a Schengen Visa to the Netherlands in 2023, which he never used, because as he explained: his request to have the trip funded by the Ministère de la Culture au Senegal was denied. In the original submission: He explained that he could not provide evidence of the visa because his old passport had been stolen (we didn't explain this in the application, but, FYI: he didn't get a loss/theft certificate because at the moment of theft, the passport was already expired).
He also indicated, in the same letter, that he wouldn’t lie about this, as he was aware IRCC could verify the claim with Schengen databases and that misrepresentation would result in a ban. He mentioned that he could not retrieve confirmation from the Netherlands as he lacked the application number (we didn't mention it in the letter: but the nethrlands can only provide info about visa application with an application number, not an official I.D.).
On January 4th, we discovered that the visa in question was actually, in all likelihood, a fake. This realization came when I asked my spouse if he had submitted biometrics for the Schengen Visa, and he said he hadn’t. He explained that the representative assisting him at the time took his passport, later returning it with what she claimed was an approved visa. He believed her, as she is the director of a cultural dance center where he used to train at the time, and as he had worked with her on projects in the past, and had been assisting him with his trip to a dance festival in the Netherlands.
We now suspect she may have "issued" the fake visa to have him apply for travel funds from the Ministère de la Culture du Sénégal through her center. My spouse was unaware of her dishonest motives. He didn't apply with fraudulent intent nor through misrepresentation on his part, neither for the Schengen Visa, nor for the funds. We stated in the LOE that she made him sign visa application documents, or so we believed at the time.
At the time of submitting the TRV application, my spouse genuinely believed the visa was legitimate and made the claim in good faith.
Since discovering the Schengen visa fraud we think he was a victim of, we have submitted three Letters of Explanation (on January 4th, 7th, and 8th) to clarify the situation to IRCC, each time adding what we thought was relevant information.
The letters explain what happened (we believe no visa application was ever made and the visa was a fake, he never intended to use it, because he didn't get the funds, and he didn't use it) and explain my husband understands he made a mistake and takes responsibility for it and will be more vigilant, but that he is uneducated (primary education) and inexperienced in visa matters, and trusted a figure of authority for him. And that to the best of his experience, he couldn't have known he would be victimized.
The letters also explain he believed his statement at the time and had not defrauded the Schengen visa bodies or the minister de la culture au Senegal. We emphasizes he didn't gain any benefits from either.
The LOEs ask for clemency and explain the cost that a ban for misrepresentation mean for our couple.
We have received automatic AORs but no confirmation the LOEs were added to the application. the tracker has not been updated since the 1t of January when eligibility was marked complete. The oldest LOE is from the 29th of december but this one is not related to the Schengen visa. Something small. But even though it's been 17 days: still no response that they added the LOE to the application.
My main concern is less about misrepresentation, although it does concern me, but: because of Battista's ruling on 09/24 (Ganeshalingam v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2024 FC 1437, it is unreasonable to conclude that there has been a misrepresentation if an error is corrected before it is discovered by IRCC. The details of the judgment can be found here: https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/526443/index.do ): I feel a bit less anxious about the trv being refused due to misrepresentation. although I am still; concerned because the ruling of one Federal judge doesn't necessarily mean the federal court has to abide on the principles of this ruling moving forward. We quoted that judgment in our letter when we asked for clemency.
I am more concerned about whether the officer might conclude there are reasonable grounds to believe my spouse committed an act of fraud toward Schengen Visa authorities or the Ministere de la Culture, though i believe that given the circumstances and the explanations provided: that would also be unlikely (the LOE categorically explains he was always truthful and acted in good faith). but I am still concerned.
My questions are:
1. if a denial happens due to misrepresentation, reasonable grounds to believe applicant committed an act or unverifiable travel/visa history, do you think our matter has a chance at judicial review?
2. if we win judicial review, in your experience, what are our chances of approved TRV?
3. do you think the case would be likely to get a settlement?
4. we haven't received emails saying the LOEs have been added to the application yet. Should we request GCMS notes?
5. how much do you think it would cost to be represented by a good lawyer in case of judicial review, a range? what's the least expensive it could be (settlement) or the most expensive it could be (full fledge judicial review)
6. In this perticular situation, what are the chances of worst case scenario?
7. Is it normal that after 17 days, 10 days, 7 days, and 6 days respectively, we still haven't received an email from IRCC Visa office saying they processed the webforms and added their contents to the Visa application?
Keep in mind spousal trv are to be processed for the most part within 30 days, and it's now been 22 days that we submitted. FYI: bio complete 4 days after submission. elligibility complete 8 days after submission, and 4 after BIO complete.
Anyone who has had experience with this type of situation, please?
@legalfalcon, I know it's quite a block of text, but if you have the time: your input would be vastly appreciated, thank you.
In the initial statement provided with the TRV application on the 23rd of december 2024, my spouse stated that he had been approved for a Schengen Visa to the Netherlands in 2023, which he never used, because as he explained: his request to have the trip funded by the Ministère de la Culture au Senegal was denied. In the original submission: He explained that he could not provide evidence of the visa because his old passport had been stolen (we didn't explain this in the application, but, FYI: he didn't get a loss/theft certificate because at the moment of theft, the passport was already expired).
He also indicated, in the same letter, that he wouldn’t lie about this, as he was aware IRCC could verify the claim with Schengen databases and that misrepresentation would result in a ban. He mentioned that he could not retrieve confirmation from the Netherlands as he lacked the application number (we didn't mention it in the letter: but the nethrlands can only provide info about visa application with an application number, not an official I.D.).
On January 4th, we discovered that the visa in question was actually, in all likelihood, a fake. This realization came when I asked my spouse if he had submitted biometrics for the Schengen Visa, and he said he hadn’t. He explained that the representative assisting him at the time took his passport, later returning it with what she claimed was an approved visa. He believed her, as she is the director of a cultural dance center where he used to train at the time, and as he had worked with her on projects in the past, and had been assisting him with his trip to a dance festival in the Netherlands.
We now suspect she may have "issued" the fake visa to have him apply for travel funds from the Ministère de la Culture du Sénégal through her center. My spouse was unaware of her dishonest motives. He didn't apply with fraudulent intent nor through misrepresentation on his part, neither for the Schengen Visa, nor for the funds. We stated in the LOE that she made him sign visa application documents, or so we believed at the time.
At the time of submitting the TRV application, my spouse genuinely believed the visa was legitimate and made the claim in good faith.
Since discovering the Schengen visa fraud we think he was a victim of, we have submitted three Letters of Explanation (on January 4th, 7th, and 8th) to clarify the situation to IRCC, each time adding what we thought was relevant information.
The letters explain what happened (we believe no visa application was ever made and the visa was a fake, he never intended to use it, because he didn't get the funds, and he didn't use it) and explain my husband understands he made a mistake and takes responsibility for it and will be more vigilant, but that he is uneducated (primary education) and inexperienced in visa matters, and trusted a figure of authority for him. And that to the best of his experience, he couldn't have known he would be victimized.
The letters also explain he believed his statement at the time and had not defrauded the Schengen visa bodies or the minister de la culture au Senegal. We emphasizes he didn't gain any benefits from either.
The LOEs ask for clemency and explain the cost that a ban for misrepresentation mean for our couple.
We have received automatic AORs but no confirmation the LOEs were added to the application. the tracker has not been updated since the 1t of January when eligibility was marked complete. The oldest LOE is from the 29th of december but this one is not related to the Schengen visa. Something small. But even though it's been 17 days: still no response that they added the LOE to the application.
My main concern is less about misrepresentation, although it does concern me, but: because of Battista's ruling on 09/24 (Ganeshalingam v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2024 FC 1437, it is unreasonable to conclude that there has been a misrepresentation if an error is corrected before it is discovered by IRCC. The details of the judgment can be found here: https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/526443/index.do ): I feel a bit less anxious about the trv being refused due to misrepresentation. although I am still; concerned because the ruling of one Federal judge doesn't necessarily mean the federal court has to abide on the principles of this ruling moving forward. We quoted that judgment in our letter when we asked for clemency.
I am more concerned about whether the officer might conclude there are reasonable grounds to believe my spouse committed an act of fraud toward Schengen Visa authorities or the Ministere de la Culture, though i believe that given the circumstances and the explanations provided: that would also be unlikely (the LOE categorically explains he was always truthful and acted in good faith). but I am still concerned.
My questions are:
1. if a denial happens due to misrepresentation, reasonable grounds to believe applicant committed an act or unverifiable travel/visa history, do you think our matter has a chance at judicial review?
2. if we win judicial review, in your experience, what are our chances of approved TRV?
3. do you think the case would be likely to get a settlement?
4. we haven't received emails saying the LOEs have been added to the application yet. Should we request GCMS notes?
5. how much do you think it would cost to be represented by a good lawyer in case of judicial review, a range? what's the least expensive it could be (settlement) or the most expensive it could be (full fledge judicial review)
6. In this perticular situation, what are the chances of worst case scenario?
7. Is it normal that after 17 days, 10 days, 7 days, and 6 days respectively, we still haven't received an email from IRCC Visa office saying they processed the webforms and added their contents to the Visa application?
Keep in mind spousal trv are to be processed for the most part within 30 days, and it's now been 22 days that we submitted. FYI: bio complete 4 days after submission. elligibility complete 8 days after submission, and 4 after BIO complete.
Anyone who has had experience with this type of situation, please?
@legalfalcon, I know it's quite a block of text, but if you have the time: your input would be vastly appreciated, thank you.
Last edited: