Any thoughts on this? opinions from both ends; Sponsor and Sponsored Spouse

[Zouk Princesse]

I doubt there will be extra paperwork for every couple and that it will more be like a "We can audit you if we have/want to" kind of deal.

Which requires retaining some form of "proof", which to me equals more paperwork. And I'm sure at the very least, every couple will have to submit a document confirming their status after 2 years.

 

[McDutch]

Shouldn't be too hard to prove you are still sharing an address, but either way, as always. Legit Couples are going to suffer because of Fraudulent cases.

HOWEVER, it is for the greater good

luckily, my application is already on the pile

 

[MSP2YYZ]

I think the intentions are good here, but:

*2 years does not protect the sponsoring spouse, it should cover the entire time period of the sponsor's financial obligation.

*Removal of conditions should be automatic and not require any application.

*The sponsored spouse should be required to leave, regardless of claims of abuse or not. Why would you choose to stay in a foreign country alone, unless you married for the purpose immigrating in the first place? This happens time and time again in the US, where the newly arrived spouse claims abuse and goes to a shelter shortly after arriving. I'm not saying there are never cases where there was actual abuse, but why would a person who just came over with no ties to the country be allowed to stay and become a welfare case (paid for by the spouse/government). There should be some type of rule that if there is a proven case of abuse during those to years, the sponsor is required to pay fo the return trip and 3-6 months upkeep of the spouse in their home country. Win-win for everyone?

I am answering this as a sponsored (and former sponsoring) spouse.

 

[couteausnob]

I could be totally off the mark here, but to me this doesn't sound like the sort of rule designed to be actively enforced (via paperwork to be filed after 2 years, random audits, etc.), but rather a back-up tool for cases in which fraud has been reported. So if there is suspicion of fraud, they can use this rule to deport the fraudster much more quickly and easily. After all, proving that someone doesn't reside with his/her sponsor is much easier than proving what thoughts went through that person's head months or years earlier.

For example, I've lived in apartment complexes in the past that had "no pet" clauses in their leases, when in fact many pets were allowed on the premises. If a pet was kept inside and never caused any problems, then management never minded, and they certainly wouldn't spend the time and resources performing pet inspections just in case a cat had been smuggled in. But if someone kept a pet that was a nuisance to the neighbors, then management could cite that clause in the lease to make the offending tenant either move out or move the pet somewhere else.

 

[Deficient]

Why is it silly?

You use the Family Class sponsorship program to be (re-united) with your loved one, not to take advantage of Canada's Awesomeness.
If all of a sudden your spouse turns into an abusive douche, you book a ticket back. Why stick around?

If the sponsored spouse has established a life in Canada, and completely dismantled and abandoned their life elsewhere, of course they would stay, isn't that a no-brainer? I would consider staying in Canada if my marriage fails (abuse or no abuse), but it would depend on how well established I am in Canada at that point. I don't think Canada is significantly more or less awesome than my home country, so for me it's not a matter of 'taking advantage', it's about being where my life is rather than being where my life isn't at that moment. My life consists of more than just my marriage.

Leaving the country would also most likely mean the abuser would never be held to account, which seems like a really poor outcome from a legal standpoint.

For some it might not be as simple as booking a ticket home, particularly if the abuser is also the one who controls the finances. Hopefully somebody in that situation could call upon someone else to quietly help them with money to get the heck out, but the brilliance of some abusers is that they are manipulative enough to convince their partner to sever ties with the people around them (who would normally act as their support network) and to even make them think it was their own idea.

I would much prefer that somebody can seek support groups locally and work out a way to get on their feet, and then they can choose to stay or leave depending on where they feel their life is the most. That to me seems better than requiring somebody to hand themselves in to CBSA to get deported to somewhere where they have nothing, having given up their previous life to be with the person in Canada. My attitude to abuse victims isn't generally "you're on your own, buddy". It seems a bit heartless.

Your view seems to suggest that no sponsored spouse should ever naturalise in Canada because they were only ever in Canada to be with their loved one, and if that relationship ends then they ought to leave, regardless of all other circumstances. We all know real life is more complex than that.

Obviously this abuse/neglect get-out clause is open to abuse, but the whole system was already open to abuse.

To me, it would be simpler if there could be a rule saying that relationships that end within two years can be reported and will be investigated for possible immigration fraud. Then those found to be fraudulent will lose PR and be removed from Canada, and those found to be legitimate can retain PR and can choose themselves if they stay or leave. It achieves exactly the same thing without opening the door to 'crying wolf' situations, which if anything is even worse than just simply being used for PR and dumped.

 

[MissDominica]

As per the above post announcement, all people who applied ON or AFTER Oct 25, 2012 for Family Class PR will now have spend 2 years in a legit relationship with their sponsors after having received PR. Those found not doing so (with the exception of applicants being abused by sponsors) are subject to removal from Canada and loss of their PR status. (I assume the same applies to Common-law and conjugal applicants, they must stay in their current relationship for 2 years after PR).

I would like to know if this is good or bad news.

In MY opinion, this is good. It is my HOPES that this will keep the fraudsters out and let people like us who have actual relationships get through a little bit easier. If fake PR applicants are deterred from applying by this new rule ("Damn it, my fake marriage won't work now because I can't divorce my sponsor 10 minutes after I land now..."), then hypothetically that would mean that TRUE applicants will be given a fair chance at coming to Canada (since hypothetically, the VOs should consider that less fake people would apply through this method and more applications coming in are legit - since people applying now know that they can't just get out of their marriage of convenience as soon as they land in Canada as PRs). Do you think this is the case? Do you think this is a GOOD thing for true relationships applying for PR? Do we have a better chance now of CIC believing that we are real and less chance of denying obviously legit relationships? I would like to think that an appilcation with good proof would get approved, since now there is the additional promise of "we will be together for 2 years in Canada after landing to show you that we are real, and if we are faking, we will likely be found out and kicked out of Canada." That's a pretty decent promise to CIC if you are genuine.

I hope it's a good thing for us. It should be. Get rid of the fakes and give a better chance to the trues.

I may just be feeling optimistic though. I hope the opposite does not happen (stricter rules means LESS true people get in).

I already applied so this new law does not apply to me, but I almost want to offer to take on this new rule to help prove my relationship is genuine. Volunteer to be a part of it, I guess, since my relationship has a few "red flags" so to speak (different race/culture). But I doubt you can do that.

It will be interesting to see how people who divorce before 2 years due to abuse will be treated. It will be hard to investigate these cases, I assume. True abused victims may have trouble getting the help they need to get out/report such issues so they are not punished by this new rule. And those who are fraudsters will cry abuse for nothing and file fake police reports to get out of fake marriages. It will be a learning curve for CIC, I think. Hopefully to everyone's advantage instead of demise.

 

[327856]

I am a bit confused with all this. If my application was filed on July 27th of this year and is now in Havana, Cuba for processing will this apply to my husband and I??? thanks for your comments

 

[R151NG5UN]

Why is it silly?

You use the Family Class sponsorship program to be (re-united) with your loved one, not to take advantage of Canada's Awesomeness.
If all of a sudden your spouse turns into an abusive douche, you book a ticket back. Why stick around?

Could not disagree more strongly with this statement. If the applicant has dedicated his/her life to being with their loved one and closed of the life they left behind i.e selling their property, quitting their job and given total 100% dedication to the life they are about to undertake and the relationship they are involved in and suddenly the relationship fails. After setting up a new life, a new job, maybe having bought new property. Why should the applicant be told your life is over here?

Most people who applied under any class have dedicated their life to choosing a new life and worked tremendously hard to adapt to a new environment and may well have closed of all ties from the country they came from to dedicate their life to their partner. I think that statement is very misguided and not how life works at all.

 

[Deficient]

I am a bit confused with all this. If my application was filed on July 27th of this year and is now in Havana, Cuba for processing will this apply to my husband and I??? thanks for your comments

No, it will not apply to you.


Wouldn't it also be a massive bummer if you moved to Canada, set up your new life and got comfortable and happy with your new job and new friends and such, and then say your sponsor cheated on you 20 months into your PR and ended the relationship? You gave up everything to be with them, and then this end result: PR revoked, say bye bye to your new job and friends and life and everything you established in good faith. I know we're all taking a pretty big life risk in moving to Canada but that seems extraordinarily cruel.

 

[MissDominica]

I am a bit confused with all this. If my application was filed on July 27th of this year and is now in Havana, Cuba for processing will this apply to my husband and I??? thanks for your comments

no - only after oct 25

 

[Deficient]

In MY opinion, this is good. It is my HOPES that this will keep the fraudsters out and let people like us who have actual relationships get through a little bit easier. If fake PR applicants are deterred from applying by this new rule ("Damn it, my fake marriage won't work now because I can't divorce my sponsor 10 minutes after I land now..."), then hypothetically that would mean that TRUE applicants will be given a fair chance at coming to Canada (since hypothetically, the VOs should consider that less fake people would apply through this method and more applications coming in are legit - since people applying now know that they can't just get out of their marriage of convenience as soon as they land in Canada as PRs). Do you think this is the case? Do you think this is a GOOD thing for true relationships applying for PR? Do we have a better chance now of CIC believing that we are real and less chance of denying obviously legit relationships? I would like to think that an appilcation with good proof would get approved, since now there is the additional promise of "we will be together for 2 years in Canada after landing to show you that we are real, and if we are faking, we will likely be found out and kicked out of Canada." That's a pretty decent promise to CIC if you are genuine.

I hope it's a good thing for us. It should be. Get rid of the fakes and give a better chance to the trues.

I may just be feeling optimistic though. I hope the opposite does not happen (stricter rules means LESS true people get in).

I doubt this new rule will mean that the existing requirements to prove a genuine relationship will be relaxed at all. I think things will remain exactly the same and they will use all of the same criteria. But this would simply give additional powers to revoke PR retrospectively in situations where they establish that the sponsored individual didn't truly belong to the family class (i.e. sham marriage) based on their actions after PR is granted.

 

[Shiny88]

Am totally agree @MSP2YYZ , if the sponsored person is here for their spouse then if they are abused or whatever is their reason to leave their sponsor why they would stay in canada,if its not because they are here for the country not the person then they should leave and go back where they come from. Its not fair cuz at the end the sponsor is in trouble, being betrayed plus paying welfare and whatever the sponsored person needs for the next 3yrs. Canada should change some rules and quick, because people are seriously abusing the system and their sponsor this way.

 

[99Shadowrider]

The way I read is that if you apply on or after Oct 25th the following applies:

The amendments to the Regulations specify that, under the family class or the spouse and common-law partner in Canada class, a spouse, common-law partner or conjugal partner who is in a relationship of two years or less with their sponsor and has no children in common with their sponsor at the time of the sponsorship application is subject to a two-year period of conditional permanent residence. The condition requires that the sponsored spouse or partner cohabit in a conjugal relationship with their sponsor for a period of two years following receipt of their permanent resident status in Canada.

So, if when you apply, your relationship has been over two years or you have children in common, this rule does not apply.

 

[simb]

please correct me if I am wrong..
this 2 year conditional pr thing applies to those who applied on or after October 26,2012
what about those who applied before?
are those as well include in this conditional thing or they are exempt?

 

[R151NG5UN]

please correct me if I am wrong..
this 2 year conditional pr thing applies to those who applied on or after October 26,2012
what about those who applied before?
are those as well include in this conditional thing or they are exempt?

Anybody who applied on or after October 25th will be subject to this new rule. Those who applied on or before October 24th 2012 will not be subject to this new legislation.

What is not clear and is still a bit hazy are following points.

1- What if married longer than 2 years but a PR less than 2 years (taken from the effective date of this rule)

2- In case of common law, Conjugal, if a couple apply say 1st Nov 2012 but have been in a relationship over 2 years then what is the deal, how is it determined? from application date or from start of relationship.