Statutory question-concern about misrepresentation

[nataliafrance]

Hi Guys

I have doubt about the following statutory question:
Has XXXX you been refused refugee status, or an immigrant or permanent resident visa (including a Certificat de sélection du Québec (CSQ) or application to the Provincial nominee Program) or visitor or temporary resident visa, to Canada or any other country?

I had applied twice in the old PR system,
1) first time, my application was sent back because of an issue with the payment (they did one attempt and it did not work, so they send back application)
2) second time, the quota were reached, so they send me back my application

For the first time I had a ref number, and I did mention somewhere in my profile that Yes I had already applied for PR. Then in my Letter of Explanation, provided further details (that this application was sent back due to a payment issue)

Question is: should have replied Yes to that Statutory question?

I have already submitted my application.. so I am not sure if I should send another Letter to explain that I did not consider my situation as being refused a permanent resident visa..etc

What do you think?

 

[bestofluck]

Has XXXX you been refused

I dont see you were refused anytime? only in case you were rejected you must write YES. Application returned is not refused. So you are fine.

 

[nataliafrance]

Has XXXX you been refused

I dont see you were refused anytime? only in case you were rejected you must write YES. Application returned is not refused. So you are fine.

Thank you !Hopefully the immigration officer will see it that way

 

[Hope16]

I have also similar concern, but I have not yet submitted my application. A couple of year I applied for CSQ but my document returned back because of quota and lack of French Language certificate. In this case should I "yes" for Statutory question above?

 

[nataliafrance]

it would be great if we get more input on this!

PPR friends , please share your input!

 

[bamshy]

Hi Guys

I have doubt about the following statutory question:
Has XXXX you been refused refugee status, or an immigrant or permanent resident visa (including a Certificat de sélection du Québec (CSQ) or application to the Provincial nominee Program) or visitor or temporary resident visa, to Canada or any other country?

I had applied twice in the old PR system,
1) first time, my application was sent back because of an issue with the payment (they did one attempt and it did not work, so they send back application)
2) second time, the quota were reached, so they send me back my application

For the first time I had a ref number, and I did mention somewhere in my profile that Yes I had already applied for PR. Then in my Letter of Explanation, provided further details (that this application was sent back due to a payment issue)

Question is: should have replied Yes to that Statutory question?

I have already submitted my application.. so I am not sure if I should send another Letter to explain that I did not consider my situation as being refused a permanent resident visa..etc

What do you think?

My initial PR application was denied after 6 months because I did not include my WES/ECA. For the second application, I chose YES for two statutory questions:

- Has XXXXXX you been refused refugee status, or an immigrant or permanent resident visa (including a Certificat de sélection du Québec (CSQ) or application to the Provincial nominee Program) or visitor or temporary resident visa, to Canada or any other country?
- Has XXXXXX ever been refused a visa or permit, denied entry or ordered to leave Canada or any other country?

Please bear in mind that I am inland but still chose YES. However, I attached a letter of explanation to my application explaining why I chose YES.

Requesting for my GCMS notes months later, the case officer made a note to reference my letter of explanation regarding statutory questions.

Eligibility - Met
Security - Not Started
Criminality - Passed
Medical - Passed (Done once but assessed twice by CIC as I used the old one for my previously rejected application which is still valid)
Background Check - Not Started

AOR - Feb 14

 

[nataliafrance]

My initial PR application was denied after 6 months because I did not include my WES/ECA. For the second application, I chose YES for two statutory questions:

- Has XXXXXX you been refused refugee status, or an immigrant or permanent resident visa (including a Certificat de sélection du Québec (CSQ) or application to the Provincial nominee Program) or visitor or temporary resident visa, to Canada or any other country?
- Has XXXXXX ever been refused a visa or permit, denied entry or ordered to leave Canada or any other country?

Please bear in mind that I am inland but still chose YES. However, I attached a letter of explanation to my application explaining why I chose YES.

Requesting for my GCMS notes months later, the case officer made a note to reference my letter of explanation regarding statutory questions.

Eligibility - Met
Security - Not Started
Criminality - Passed
Medical - Passed (Done once but assessed twice by CIC as I used the old one for my previously rejected application which is still valid)
Background Check - Not Started

AOR - Feb 14

So your case seems to suggest that it is better to say Yes to those statutory questions?

what do you mean by " the case officer made a note to reference my letter of explanation regarding statutory questions." what did he say?

Thanks a lot for your reply!

 

[bestofluck]

I have also similar concern, but I have not yet submitted my application. A couple of year I applied for CSQ but my document returned back because of quota and lack of French Language certificate. In this case should I "yes" for Statutory question above?

same reply for you. Application returned is not rejected or refused, they have clearly mentioned it. do not confuse urself and say 'No'. Remember a refusal or rejection only comes into picture when processing for any application is done. In none of your cases the application has undergone processing.

 

[bestofluck]

So your case seems to suggest that it is better to say Yes to those statutory questions?

what do you mean by " the case officer made a note to reference my letter of explanation regarding statutory questions." what did he say?

Thanks a lot for your reply!

Remember a refusal or rejection only comes into picture when processing for any application is done. In none of your cases the application has undergone processing. Once you get AOR and processing starts and the application is rejected or refused than you have to say yes. Please understand this carefully. It seems bamshy's application was denied means it was processed and than returned. your case is different.

 

[nataliafrance]

Remember a refusal or rejection only comes into picture when processing for any application is done. In none of your cases the application has undergone processing. Once you get AOR and processing starts and the application is rejected or refused than you have to say yes. Please understand this carefully. It seems bamshy's application was denied means it was processed and than returned. your case is different.

Thanks for clarifying.
In the old system, they would review all document, before taking payment..Hence I was not sure that they could consider my initial application as processed.

I really hope this is ok!

Thanks again

 

[dupsy21]

I have applied for Alberta PNP before but my application was returned because I did not include Toefl tests and was given some weeks to include the Toefl. I decided not to continue with the application.

I chose "No" for the statutory question. I was told to complete Schedule A and I still chose "No" but I used the space provided to explain that I do not consider the application as rejected as it was returned as incomplete. I have got my PPR since April.

Therefore, since you had taken your time to explain of the 2 situations, I do not think it is misrepresentation. You have not hidden the information.

 

[riazkhan1988]

hi

iam planning to apply through EE, i was refused a student visa to USA in 2010 as they thought i would settle there, in 2014 i reapplied student visa to USA.........but in 2014 while filling online forms to get F1 i mentioned name of different emploer under whom i never worked, as my employer that time dint give me docs of exp proof and got my student visa........however i dint go to USA for studies due to personal reasons, infact i never entered USA........now iam going to show experience in EE under my original employer(with all proofs).....will this be a problem.

Advise will be appreciated.

 

[nataliafrance]

I have applied for Alberta PNP before but my application was returned because I did not include Toefl tests and was given some weeks to include the Toefl. I decided not to continue with the application.

I chose "No" for the statutory question. I was told to complete Schedule A and I still chose "No" but I used the space provided to explain that I do not consider the application as rejected as it was returned as incomplete. I have got my PPR since April.

Therefore, since you had taken your time to explain of the 2 situations, I do not think it is misrepresentation. You have not hidden the information.

I don't see where you have space to explain.. but maybe because my Schedule status is "not needed at this time'.

In the letter of explanation I did not explain why I chose NO in the statutory question.. I only explained my situation related to one question in the profile where you are asked if you had previously applied to PR>

 

[smtele]

I think you will be fine. A return is not the same as a refusal.

 

[bestofluck]

I have applied for Alberta PNP before but my application was returned because I did not include Toefl tests and was given some weeks to include the Toefl. I decided not to continue with the application.

I chose "No" for the statutory question. I was told to complete Schedule A and I still chose "No" but I used the space provided to explain that I do not consider the application as rejected as it was returned as incomplete. I have got my PPR since April.

Therefore, since you had taken your time to explain of the 2 situations, I do not think it is misrepresentation. You have not hidden the information.

Even in the case you would have not explained them, you would have got your PPR. most of the explanations are unwanted when things are so clearly mentioned.