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

[Pippin]

I think 9J is the wise man here....it has all been said. CIO have gone home to make their dinners, so no more good news until tomorrow (unless a FEW people have yet to check their email today.)

 

[queencougar]

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

Unless of course you wish to emigrate to Australia

I'm off to bed, too.
Well done and all my best wishes to all the lucky people today and my sincere hopes for success tomorrow to all. It will be a long time before I forget what the wait was like for me and so I wish greater speed to those still waiting.
Night night!

 

[Advance123]

"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I do not know of anyone who has been able to sue CIO under the circumstances you mention - in fact, PR status can be withdrawn at any time even once an applicant has landed in Canada and they can give any reason they choose.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.

I am giving the information I have so that people won't be confused. My sources are confidential and so far with all the applications I've been involved with, they have been right. Certain things are personal including the sources of my information. It is not essential for it to be approved or accepted, I am simply sharing information. Normally I don't get myself involved with these debates because of my busy daily schedule. I am only getting involved today because I am off work for the day. When you talk about experience you assume I haven't been through this process before. I have done this before for people close to me. I only decided to apply because Architecture was included in June 2010. I will reiterate, the final indicates final eligibility review not verification of application.The CIO work based on laid down guidelines but the VO is given a bit of license to determine the veracity of an application. They can approve or disapprove based on intuition. They are the most important obstacle.

 

[Advance123]

"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.

Regarding whether you can sue or not, I think you need to get access to immigration cases that have been successfully overturned. You can challenge any decision if you can prove your case. An example is below:

"LANG ZHENG v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)

A Visa Officer cannot be willfully blind in assessing an application and must act in good faith. The Officer rejected the applicant’s claim after noticing an obvious error in the latter’s education history. The respondent cited Lam v. M.C.I., (1998), 152 F.T.R. 316, which outlines a proviso with respect to the obligations of the Visa Officer and the exercise of discretion. The Judge concluded that the Officer exercised poor judgment by not asking for clarification regarding the obvious error which led to the rejection of the initial application."

Knowing your legal standing helps your case when you run into trouble.

 

[voicu]

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.

All due respect , you have no idea what i was talking about ! Please see the quotation i made there...

 

[voicu]

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.

What I was saying is that the FINAL DETERMINATION is not based on the file "AS IS", as you suggested, since some people still need to add things to the file (PCC's at least)...

 

[linkrink]

my eCAS status - "In Process"

please update the spreadsheet (row#6).

thanks.

 

[Advance123]

All due respect , you have no idea what i was talking about ! Please see the quotation i made there...

I have come to conclude that it is only worth responding when questions are directed to you.

All apologies for responding to your query.

I am using a representative so the contributions made here make no difference to my application. I only contribute to assist those who are applying by themselves. The way people respond to differing comments is quite disheartening.

I will be selective to the queries I respond to.

 

[voicu]

Updated my friend

Amro

Thanks Amro,
Can you please correct the delivery date as well please?

Thanks.

 

[04vancouver]

Hi everyone, We have been watching and reading this forum since September. It's an amazing forum and we have felt everyone's feelings of frustration, upset and joy! It's been an almighty long wait and to be honest I didn't post on here before as I thought it might 'curse' our application. We did however promise that no matter what the outcome was we would post on here if nothing more than to help/share/inform others.

However - my husband and I are THRILLED to be able to join this forum with the fantastic news that we received our PER today at 15.56 GMT. To everyone else who is still waiting - we wish you evey luck - please keep positive. There is still a long way to go but fingers crossed we will be celebrating our children's next birthdays in Canada????

Wayne, nice to finally address you - PLEASE can you FINALLY add us in BLUE ;D to the spreadsheet:
App posted: 8th Sept
App Received: 15th Sept
CC charged: 30th Sept
NOC: 1122
Visa office: London
PER:27th Jan

 

[pradeepkumar_v]

Hi Guys, My e-cas says In Progress please update in spreadsheet.

When I cliked In progress click it says Application received on August 16, 2010. Medical results have been received. What is opinion on this guys?. Let me know please.

Thanks,

Pradeep

 

[voicu]

I have come to conclude that it is only worth responding when questions are directed to you.

All apologies for responding to your query.

I am using a representative so the contributions made here make no difference to my application. I only contribute to assist those who are applying by themselves. The way people respond to differing comments is quite disheartening.

I will be selective to the queries I respond to.

I am sorry , I did not mean to sound like that.
All I was saying is that your in my initial post I was disagreeing with Pippin's opinion a little, that FINAL DETERMINATION is based on the file AS IS, since some people STILL need to add info to that file to be filanny approved through the process... That is all I was saying. I did not talked about the purpose of the PCC's, I do know that is for VO to check and all that..
Your input there was about the purpose of PCC, not what I was debating...

So I am really sorry if I offended you, I assure you it was not my intention. I really think everyone's input here is valuable and I hope you will still continue to provide yours...
It is a open forum after all, we all have same goal and try to help each other.

Thanks.

 

[Cappuccino]

Hi everyone, We have been watching and reading this forum since September. It's an amazing forum and we have felt everyone's feelings of frustration, upset and joy! It's been an almighty long wait and to be honest I didn't post on here before as I thought it might 'curse' our application. We did however promise that no matter what the outcome was we would post on here if nothing more than to help/share/inform others.

However - my husband and I are THRILLED to be able to join this forum with the fantastic news that we received our PER today at 15.56 GMT. To everyone else who is still waiting - we wish you evey luck - please keep positive. There is still a long way to go but fingers crossed we will be celebrating our children's next birthdays in Canada????

Wayne, nice to finally address you - PLEASE can you FINALLY add us in BLUE ;D to the spreadsheet:
App posted: 8th Sept
App Received: 15th Sept
CC charged: 30th Sept
NOC: 1122
Visa office: London
PER:27th Jan

Added
Wayne.

 

[Canada 1]

Advance 123

I hope you don't take an extra day off from work and try to prove your point.

Congratulations to all who got their PR today and all the best to the rest.

Regarding whether you can sue or not, I think you need to get access to immigration cases that have been successfully overturned. You can challenge any decision if you can prove your case. An example is below:

"LANG ZHENG v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)

A Visa Officer cannot be willfully blind in assessing an application and must act in good faith. The Officer rejected the applicant's claim after noticing an obvious error in the latter's education history. The respondent cited Lam v. M.C.I., (1998), 152 F.T.R. 316, which outlines a proviso with respect to the obligations of the Visa Officer and the exercise of discretion. The Judge concluded that the Officer exercised poor judgment by not asking for clarification regarding the obvious error which led to the rejection of the initial application."

Knowing your legal standing helps your case when you run into trouble.

 

[Advance123]

I am sorry , I did not mean to sound like that.
All I was saying is that your in my initial post I was disagreeing with Pippin's opinion a little, that FINAL DETERMINATION is based on the file AS IS, since some people STILL need to add info to that file to be filanny approved through the process... That is all I was saying. I did not talked about the purpose of the PCC's, I do know that is for VO to check and all that..
Your input there was about the purpose of PCC, not what I was debating...

So I am really sorry if I offended you, I assure you it was not my intention. I really think everyone's input here is valuable and I hope you will still continue to provide yours...
It is a open forum after all, we all have same goal and try to help each other.

Thanks.

I get frustrated when people try to be condescending when you don't align with their opinions. My frustration is not with you as an individual. It is more about the tone and this idea of we are in the family of opinion givers and others are not.

There are too many sly comments coming across from simpletons on this forum that get to me. We don't know each other personally. We don't know who is who and what each person does for a living. A little bit of respect goes a long way. A person disagreeing with you does not automatically become your enemy. The great thing about western culture is the ability to express yourself and be engaged in intense debate without coming out as condescending.

I do appreciate your response and I am not annoyed about your specific comment. If i have come out as being in your face I'm really sorry but that is who I am. I'm not a lame follower and I challenge anything I do not agree with. That is my basic right as a human being and so is yours.

I wish you a successful application.

Regards