Applications after 26/6 in any NOC CONNECT HERE TO GET THE STATUS

[Cam1234]

BINGO...just got it...the FINAL DETERMINATION means the decision is based on the application AS IS. With post 26/6, no further docs are requested (in most cases) so the determination for further processing is considered FINAL, not provisional as it would have been in the pre 26/6 era when the documents were requested to be sent to VO specific for FINAL DETERMINATION.
Debate???

Hi Pippin:

Yes, I completely agree with you. Pre June 26 2010 applicants would send a small application to CIO, basically claiming that their work experience would qualify them in a NOC. CIO would respond with an AOR if they thought the claim was OK and would send the small application to VO. VO would request all documentation, specifically go over proof that the work experience was valid and that it met MI criteria. If the applicant passed, they would then get a positive Final Eligibility that their work experience meets the criteria mentioned in MI... at least that is how I understand it.

Cam

 

[anil04_10]

Calling it PER is certainly confusing many. It is actually an AOR (Acknowledgement of Receipt). This has nothing to do with eligibilty rather it is issued after completeness to indicate that CIC has received your application. They are simply acknowledging receipt. ..........
................... with the VO not with CIC.

2 Weeks? Clearly the application tracker indicates that the shortest time period for receiving the AOR is 93 days. Thats more than 2 weeks. There is nothing like PER in CIC vocabulary. PER was created on this forum to give a positive tilt to the process and to encourage forum members. ................ picks it up for processing.

Dear friend

Now a days I hardly comment on any body's post ...... but after reading your numerous (or say humorous) posts I am forced to post my views ......

I don't know bro, if you have some basic problem with everyone in this thread, WE ALL are giving just our views thinking, WHAT WE feel may be correct. And you post exactly opposite to that, let it be Wayne, Kolhapuri, CanadaJimmy and after this .... I will also be in your list :

I agree with you, if someone has got a very serious problem with his application status, should go with immigration lawyers / consultants. But if it is simple and not with much complications, should file themselves. I won't be surprised if you are a lawyer ...(though NOC shows Architect)

Yes ... we have coined AOR as PER. Do you really think forum members will get encouraged and process will get a positive tilt ........ LOL ...... It was termed on the basis of the information provided in the PER (sorry AOR ... I too agree) .... Positive Eligibility Review ....and that too Final ..

CanadaJimmy was referring about the pre June 26 AORs .... 2 weeks criteria. 93 days is for post June 26 procedure. Previously CIO used to send the AOR as soon as they received the application (after initial completeness check). Now they are not only checking the application for completeness, but also conducting the Eligibility Review. Which explains the number of days for our PER.

There are so many things in CIO vocabulary, that at least I do get confused. And even if it is not there, will be added soon (or vice-versa). Take the case of 'In Process' .....

Don't want to get much into ranting ML ...... Peace!!

Cheers, Anil

 

[voicu]

Hello All,

Today, Jan 27 , at only two days after my application received my CC was charged .
Can you please update the info on the spreadsheet :

App. Filed.......: 20-01-2011
App. Delivered: 25-01-2011
CC Charged....: 27-01-2011

Thanks in advance.

Oh and in regards to this hot debate here, I think we need to calm down, since it's obvious the whole new emigration system is not very well defined and documented yet.
We can see the huge error eCAS shows (I am talking about medicals received). Also the whole IELTS saga, the error e-mail responses some people receive ... and other issues with the new system.

I think CIC simply did not properly u updated all it's documentation, and so analyzing the whole real situation based on old/incorrect docs that can also be interpreted in different ways is simply a waste of time that would not get us anywhere...

Thanks.

 

[Advance123]

The problem here is that no-one really understands what changes have been made to the system of processing and these are only being revealed as we, the vanguard of new applicants go through the new process.
The main changes so far are evident in the communication that applicants are receiving.
In the past, CIO only checked the forms, because that was all you used to send!
Then the Visa Office used to send the AOR and then a letter requesting the rest of the documents within 120 days (- birth certificate, qualifications, job references and contracts etc.)
This was sent when the VO actually received your file, but it did not mean that they were ready to do anything with it.
Applicants then had to check their status to find out when their file was described as "in process", which indicated their file was actually being looked at and some time after that they received a Medical Request and then Passport requests.
NOW CIO clearly check all the documentation for completeness and assess the points based on the whole pack. They then issue what we call PER. We should not call it AOR because it is much more than the old AOR.
This means that when it reaches the VO, they only have to do random checks, request the Police checks (if they have not been included at the start) and then they are ready to issue the Medical requests.
The guidelines being referred to by posters are most probably an amalgamation of all the rules that are currently being applied to applicants from Pre-June 26th and Post-June 26th. This is probably why it is confusing.
It is clear from the reasons currently being given for refusals as well as the wording of the new e-mail approvals that the system is now much more heavily weighted at the CIO end the VO has had a lot of their workload removed. This has also been reflected in the shortened processing times recently for applicants who had submitted their full pack under the old rules just before they changed. The VO has had a weight lifted from them by the change of processing system and so they have been able to get their backlog down.

We can call it PER here but the CIC still see it as an AOR. It is mandatory, part of legal requirements, for government offices to acknowledge the receipt of any documents. This is why to them it remains an acknowledgement. You will get 2 AORs, one from the CIO and one from the VO. If they say your review is positive, they can be sued if they later on refuse a visa. This is why words like positive is not casually thrown up in their communications. They can say final but certainly not positive. It has legal implications.

 

[voicu]

BINGO...just got it...the FINAL DETERMINATION means the decision is based on the application AS IS. With post 26/6, no further docs are requested (in most cases) so the determination for further processing is considered FINAL, not provisional as it would have been in the pre 26/6 era when the documents were requested to be sent to VO specific for FINAL DETERMINATION.
Debate???

But then how can this be true, since there are people who did not include PCC for example and still getting an FINAL DETERMINATION PER... They are obviously going to be requested additional docs, at least the PCC, no ?

 

[visara]

can anyone tell me what does the no of complete application received refer to??
does it count only those who receive PER or does it count all those who sent in the application???
gosh!!!!!this is so confusing and is taking my life....errrrrrrrrrrgghhhhh
HELP!!!!

 

[voicu]

can anyone tell me what does the no of complete application received refer to??
does it count only those who receive PER or does it count all those who sent in the application???
gosh!!!!!this is so confusing and is taking my life....errrrrrrrrrrgghhhhh
HELP!!!!

Refers to exactly what it says "Received applications", It's not PER's, it's not sent, it's RECEIVED... So all that got there, they can provide this number since the new requirement of including the NOC on the envelope. So whenever a new application is RECEIVED this number increases, regardless of the future outcome of this application.

 

[Advance123]

Dear friend

Now a days I hardly comment on any body's post ...... but after reading your numerous (or say humorous) posts I am forced to post my views ......

I don't know bro, if you have some basic problem with everyone in this thread, WE ALL are giving just our views thinking, WHAT WE feel may be correct. And you post exactly opposite to that, let it be Wayne, Kolhapuri, CanadaJimmy and after this .... I will also be in your list :

I agree with you, if someone has got a very serious problem with his application status, should go with immigration lawyers / consultants. But if it is simple and not with much complications, should file themselves. I won't be surprised if you are a lawyer ...(though NOC shows Architect)

Yes ... we have coined AOR as PER. Do you really think forum members will get encouraged and process will get a positive tilt ........ LOL ...... It was termed on the basis of the information provided in the PER (sorry AOR ... I too agree) .... Positive Eligibility Review ....and that too Final ..

CanadaJimmy was referring about the pre June 26 AORs .... 2 weeks criteria. 93 days is for post June 26 procedure. Previously CIO used to send the AOR as soon as they received the application (after initial completeness check). Now they are not only checking the application for completeness, but also conducting the Eligibility Review. Which explains the number of days for our PER.

There are so many things in CIO vocabulary, that at least I do get confused. And even if it is not there, will be added soon (or vice-versa). Take the case of 'In Process' .....

Don't want to get much into ranting ML ...... Peace!!

Cheers, Anil

Your idea that certain people on this forum, including yourself, is some kind of tin God with all knowledge about this process is what is laughable. We dropped the issue of lawyers ages ago, agreeing that every one should go with what they are comfortable with, but you had to bring it up again. You show a lot of pettiness. I haven't queried the use of PER. I have simply explained what it is and what it was meant to achieve. What you feel is not necessarily correct and I'm sure people here will rather want to hear what is correct. Learn to listen to other peoples opinions and stop being obtuse.

 

[Amro Elsayed]

Hello All,

Today, Jan 27 , at only two days after my application received my CC was charged .
Can you please update the info on the spreadsheet :

App. Filed.......: 20-01-2011
App. Delivered: 25-01-2011
CC Charged....: 27-01-2011

Thanks in advance.

Oh and in regards to this hot debate here, I think we need to calm down, since it's obvious the whole new emigration system is not very well defined and documented yet.
We can see the huge error eCAS shows (I am talking about medicals received). Also the whole IELTS saga, the error e-mail responses some people receive ... and other issues with the new system.

I think CIC simply did not properly u updated all it's documentation, and so analyzing the whole real situation based on old/incorrect docs that can also be interpreted in different ways is simply a waste of time that would not get us anywhere...

Thanks.

Updated my friend

Amro

 

[Advance123]

But then how can this be true, since there are people who did not include PCC for example and still getting an FINAL DETERMINATION PER... They are obviously going to be requested additional docs, at least the PCC, no ?

The PCC is only required by the VO. CIO will not do background checks so it is not important at this stage. Sending it early will speed up the process when it gets to the VOs.

 

[marfar]

congratulation for the PER please can you provide us with the payment date thanks alot

Amro

I HAVE AN INQUIRY,could you please help me,i got my PER but i had not sent my transcripts, should i send them based on my file no or wait till my VO request it.i am not sure maybe they wont need it in first place!

 

[Cam1234]

The VO has had a weight lifted from them by the change of processing system and so they have been able to get their backlog down.

Hi Queencouger:

Yes I could not agree more, basically Minister Kenney has put a halt on immigration this year. What are we at last count, 6900 applicants? VOs are used to handling over 200,000 FSW applications a year. There is currently a backlog of 400,000. With these new rules limiting the number of immigrants, they hope to process 200,000 of the backlog applications this year.

Cam

 

[Pippin]

But then how can this be true, since there are people who did not include PCC for example and still getting an FINAL DETERMINATION PER... They are obviously going to be requested additional docs, at least the PCC, no ?

I think this is because security checks are done by VO not CIO, so an up to date, valid PCC would be of value to VO only. CIO determines the eligibility for PROCESSING which occurs at VO.

 

[queencougar]

We can call it PER here but the CIC still see it as an AOR. It is mandatory, part of legal requirements, for government offices to acknowledge the receipt of any documents. This is why to them it remains an acknowledgement. You will get 2 AORs, one from the CIO and one from the VO. If they say your review is positive, they can be sued if they later on refuse a visa. This is why words like positive is not casually thrown up in their communications. They can say final but certainly not positive. It has legal implications.

"CIC still see it as an AOR"
Do they? On what proof are you basing this statement?
"You will get 2 AORs, one from the CIO and one from the VO."
How do you know this?
It has not been proved that this is true at all. Even on other forums elsewhere on which experienced Visa Officers post their comments, they have not yet established that there will be any AOR from the Visa Office as happened before. Also, in the past it was always the VO that put the "in Process" notice on a file, now it is CIO. It is most likely thought that there will not be an AOR from the VO, but the status will be updated by them after they receive it. The Visa Office are not legally obliged to acknowledge receipt of an applicant's documents, as now the documents are sent to them by an internal system, not from any outside agency.
I do not know of anyone who has been able to sue CIO under the circumstances you mention - in fact, PR status can be withdrawn at any time even once an applicant has landed in Canada and they can give any reason they choose. PR is given on their terms and is theirs to refuse or even withdraw in retrospect.
This forum has used the terms "positive" and "negative" simply to distinguish between passing the first stage of the review or sadly not passing it. I cannot see how "final" has any less legal implication than "positive", in fact it would be more correct to say that "final" implies much more in this context than positive, since final means that it is all over and nothing is left to be done, while positive only implies a possible or partial achievement.
You make many statements as though they are fact, Advance123, yet there is no evidence to support these claims. If you have inside information, then please reveal your sources, but otherwise you are just giving your opinion like everyone else and should present it as such.
We would not want inexperienced readers to be misguided.

 

[9jcanada]

A wise man once said: "If you find yourself in a hole, stop digging". Nuff said. Goodluck to all in our wait people.

Good night, off to bed ===>

9j