Received GCMS notes.
Under Assessment it is written: Eligibility- Review Required.
Under Application Assignment it is written: Due Date- 10th June 2022
What does it mean?
Please guide
@legalfalcon
Understanding “Review Required”
A lot of applicants see “review required” in their GCMS notes for eligibility. There are many theories floating around with regard to what “review required” means and if it is alarming.
Before I venture into explaining the significance, it is important to understand that each application goes through the following stages as per the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act and the regulations (Canadian Immigration Law):
R10 – Completeness Check
Criminality
Medicals
A11.2 – eligibility
Security
Out of the above, the most important stage is eligibility. This is also the most time-consuming stage because your documents have to be verified, evaluated and assessed to ascertain that you meet the eligibility criteria for the program you have applied to (FSW / CEC / FTW). To streamline this process and make it easier for an immigration officer (decision-making authority), all applications are first evaluated by case analysts or program assistants. They review the documents and summarize them in the GCMS. If they have any concerns with any document or want the immigration officer to carefully look into a specific document, they will flag it as “review required.” It is the content of the note that is important here. If the review required is for a specific document, while the summary of the note says that an applicant has met the eligibility, or is “ready to finalize” it simply means that while the applicant has met the eligibility criteria, the specific document needs a careful examination form the officer before promoting (eligibility pass) by the officer.
However, if there are concerns, there will be a review required for the eligibility, and there will be no text to the effect of “ready to finalize” or pass. The note will specifically state job duties do not match, the employee cannot be verified, or the number of years of work experience claimed cannot be verified. This is where an application can land in muddy waters. But the final decision rests on the immigration officer. He may override the decision of the analyst/assistant or go with the analysis of the analyst/assistant.
Even in cases where the analyst/assistant is of the opinion that the applicant has met the eligibility, and there is no “review required,” the officer can replace it with his own opinion. Though rare, it does happen. This is why the eligibility is only passed when an officer conclusively marks the eligibility as passed.
Finally, there is a “review required” for PoF. This is the most common in many applications. This is because the financial and banking practices of each country are different. Eg. Fixed deposits are known as Certificate of Deposit (CD) in the US. Similarly, treasury bonds, mutual funds, stocks, and many other investment vehicles are there. If your PoF is anything other than a bank deposit, it is more likely that it will be marked as “review required.” Also, IRCC does not go by day-to-day fluctuations in FOREX. Instead, the Canadian federal government issued a quarterly conversion rate for all FOREX vis-a-via CAD. If your PoF is in a foreign currency, then you may have a “review required” for the officer to make a determination.
Just because you have “review required” does not mean that you hit the panic mode. Instead, read the context in which it is there. If there is a concern regarding a document, you can send a replacement document via CSE. The most common reasons for RR are:
1. Work reference letter without job duties
2. Work reference letters missing all the details requested by IRCC
3. If you submitted a letter from a colleague because you were unable to get one from your employer, but did not have a LoE on file, this too will lead to RR.
4. Not sufficient work experience in the primary NOC.
5. Inability to verify your employment as your employer details are missing.
6. Prior visa rejections.
These are just some of the scenarios.
