Advice please

[Havocshort]

If anyone can help with this,I'd be eternally greatfull.

My wife and son came to Canada 2011 but my daughter (non-biological) was excluded so she could finish her schooling and we (my wife and I) could set up things for her here. My wife had to sign a document (that was translated wrong to her) stating she would not try to bring her little girl to Canada. My wife was under the impression that she would not try at this time to bring her daughter to Canada.
Now we have gone through two lawyers to try and to get her here and they have both struck out. Now the last lawyer said that my daughter can't even come to visit and that she has been black flagged from entering canada at all.

If you have ANY clue as to how long the ban will last or how we can get her here... PLEASE let me know.

Thank you

 

[canuck_in_uk]

If the child was excluded from the Family Class, then she cannot ever be sponsored. It sounds like you and your wife received some very bad advice; the child needed to be included in the original app as non-accompanying.

That said, being excluded from the Family Class does not mean that she is banned from Canada.

 

[ifeedly]

If the lawyers have refused the case they may have told you why? Usually when a lawyer rejects the case there are strong reasons for them to do that.

who translated it wrong to her? You are still considered responsible for mistakes made by your representative unless you have sued your representative and court has found that your case is true.
If the document was in english then your wife's english credentials will be a key factor. who was the principal applicant? you or your wife?
if the child still under 19? who was the sponsor? what were the sponsors english credentials? did sponsor agreed to not bring the child to Canada?

She is not banned from Canada, the situation is that she cannot be sponsored by you because you guys agreed she is a be non-accompanying family member.

 

[canuck_in_uk]

If the lawyers have refused the case they may have told you why? Usually when a lawyer rejects the case there are strong reasons for them to do that.

Because the child was excluded from the Family Class...

If the document was in english then your wife's english credentials will be a key factor.
who was the principal applicant? you or your wife?
if the child still under 19?
who was the sponsor?
what were the sponsors english credentials?
did sponsor agreed to not bring the child to Canada?

Her "English credentials" mean nothing.

He sponsored her, so obviously she was the PA.

It doesn't matter how old the child is.

Again, he was the sponsor.

His "English credentials" also mean nothing.

As he said, they excluded the child.

She is not banned from Canada, the situation is that she cannot be sponsored by you because you guys agreed she is a be non-accompanying family member.

Incorrect. Non-accompanying family members are fully included in the app and can be sponsored at a later date. The child was excluded, which is completely different.

 

[Rob_TO]

If anyone can help with this,I'd be eternally greatfull.

My wife and son came to Canada 2011 but my daughter (non-biological) was excluded so she could finish her schooling and we (my wife and I) could set up things for her here. My wife had to sign a document (that was translated wrong to her) stating she would not try to bring her little girl to Canada. My wife was under the impression that she would not try at this time to bring her daughter to Canada.
Now we have gone through two lawyers to try and to get her here and they have both struck out. Now the last lawyer said that my daughter can't even come to visit and that she has been black flagged from entering canada at all.

If you have ANY clue as to how long the ban will last or how we can get her here... PLEASE let me know.

Thank you

If the child was excluded from the app (so not medically examined and not listed as a non-accompanying dependents), then she can NEVER be sponsored to Canada under family class PR app.

She should be able to come as a visitor only, or perhaps under a student visa. She will be expected to follow the rules of any visa she has, and to leave Canada when they expire.

Perhaps when she is old enough and if she qualifies, she can apply to immigrate to Canada independently as PR under one of the worker/economic streams.

 

[ifeedly]

Because the child was excluded from the Family Class...


Her "English credentials" mean nothing.

He sponsored her, so obviously she was the PA.

It doesn't matter how old the child is.

Again, he was the sponsor.

His "English credentials" also mean nothing.

As he said, they excluded the child.


Incorrect. Non-accompanying family members are fully included in the app and can be sponsored at a later date. The child was excluded, which is completely different.

Thanks Rob_To for your insightful comments.

Canuck_in_uk Thanks for you comments too.

I guess the OP is asking about possible grounds, therefore one of the options available for them is Malpractice suite against representative if they can prove their claim.
I am also aware the not being able to sponsor that all of us are talking about is from regulation 117(9)(d) but the OP needs to figure out if the exceptions to regulation 117(9)(d) apply in their case.
Knowing that two lawyers have already refused the case does not sound too promising for the OP's case but at the same time it does not hurt to ask questions to see if any legal recourse still exist for OP.
community supported forums also serve the purpose of highlighting a case and to figure out if anybody else has faced a similar situation and if anybody can provide some help.
Just because a lawyer has refused the case does not automatically mean there is no hope. It may also mean that the lawyers deemed the case to have high chances of failure, but for a person facing the issue even 1% chance means a lot.

 

[Rob_TO]

I guess the OP is asking about possible grounds, therefore one of the options available for them is Malpractice suite against representative if they can prove their claim.

Doesn't matter if the lawyer screwed up or gave bad advice. Ultimately it's the responsibility of the sponsor and applicants to ensure their app is correct. Even winning a malpractice suit against the lawyer (which is probably not realistic) would do nothing in terms of CIC allowing the sponsorship. The daughter is still barred for life to be sponsored under family class.

I am also aware the not being able to sponsor that all of us are talking about is from regulation 117(9)(d) but the OP needs to figure out if the exceptions to regulation 117(9)(d) apply in their case.

What exceptions? In general there are no exceptions to this rule.

 

[scylla]

Thanks Rob_To for your insightful comments.

Canuck_in_uk Thanks for you comments too.

I guess the OP is asking about possible grounds, therefore one of the options available for them is Malpractice suite against representative if they can prove their claim.
I am also aware the not being able to sponsor that all of us are talking about is from regulation 117(9)(d) but the OP needs to figure out if the exceptions to regulation 117(9)(d) apply in their case.
Knowing that two lawyers have already refused the case does not sound too promising for the OP's case but at the same time it does not hurt to ask questions to see if any legal recourse still exist for OP.
community supported forums also serve the purpose of highlighting a case and to figure out if anybody else has faced a similar situation and if anybody can provide some help.
Just because a lawyer has refused the case does not automatically mean there is no hope. It may also mean that the lawyers deemed the case to have high chances of failure, but for a person facing the issue even 1% chance means a lot.

They can certainly sue the lawyer - but that won't get their daughter to Canada or change the current situation. As others have explained, if the daughter wasn't medically examined, then she is permanently excluded from being sponsored. That's all there is to it and her mother signed a legally binding agreement confirming she would never be able to sponsor her daughter. If the daughter wants to immigrate to Canada she will have to qualify on her own as a adult.

 

[Havocshort]

Thank you all for your information. I'm afraid I'm moving to China with what's been said but I do thank you all very much for your help.