Minimum how many days need to be renew PR Card
- Thread starter girls
- Start date
And you ignored all of the rest? WOW! You could have just used my other post then where I saidAlabaman said:
I thought I made it clear there but obviously not. I love how people read/hear/see only what they want to.rjessome said:
Immigration may check 80% of the time but if they do not have instant access to all information, that isn't much use. It is true that according to your links, a lot of people got caught and had to appeal and many of them lost their PR. However, there is no data on all the people who didn't get caught.
Like you, I use to think that immigration was very effective in catching people who didn't meet the residency requirements. Then I started seeing some people post that they had gotten into Canada without meeting them or they knew someone who did and then I thought, ok, maybe I was wrong. Maybe immigration doesn't have instant access to all the data and maybe they don't check all the time. So ok, not all the people who got caught come to this forum but not all the people who got away with it come to this forum either.
Like you, I use to think that immigration was very effective in catching people who didn't meet the residency requirements. Then I started seeing some people post that they had gotten into Canada without meeting them or they knew someone who did and then I thought, ok, maybe I was wrong. Maybe immigration doesn't have instant access to all the data and maybe they don't check all the time. So ok, not all the people who got caught come to this forum but not all the people who got away with it come to this forum either.
Hi Leon,
Actually, my links weren't even to say that alot of people DO get caught. They were just to point out the law. And I SO wish I had never used the 80/20 rule!!! It's a commonly used and accepted Six Sigma principle correctly known as the Pareto principle. But ANYWAY, I don't think I said anywhere that CBSA checks 80% of the people. Perhaps I didn't point out my use of the principle clearly enough. I was never trying to state as fact that CBSA checks out 80% of the people.
And you are absolutely right that there is no data on all the people that didn't get caught. And of course they don't all come here. Just like all the people that do get caught don't appeal the decision. Again, I thought it would be self evident that I was encompassing both arguements yet focusing on the other poster's only stated research methodology coming from this board. Once again, I guess I wasn't clear.
All I can say is that because of the type of work I do, I see a great number of people who do get caught. I also see a few who got away with it but then again, there will a greater number of the former in my office because of the nature of my work. Seeing what I see in real life, when I'm on this forum I feel obliged to be cautionary and advise people of potential consequences. And in my original response, you will note that I never said that the poster's father would not get into Canada unchecked. In fact, I told them what he should do if he did get in. But I happen to think his chance of getting checked or at least questioned is much greater than not. There we can agree to disagree. Maybe he'll get lucky and then good for him. But I still think he should know the risk he's taking. And like you, I will never advise someone on here to lie to CBSA or CIC.
All of this will be a moot point eventually once Canada implements wider issuance of biometric passports. There's also been greater chatter about passport exit controls but we will see about that.
Actually, my links weren't even to say that alot of people DO get caught. They were just to point out the law. And I SO wish I had never used the 80/20 rule!!! It's a commonly used and accepted Six Sigma principle correctly known as the Pareto principle. But ANYWAY, I don't think I said anywhere that CBSA checks 80% of the people. Perhaps I didn't point out my use of the principle clearly enough. I was never trying to state as fact that CBSA checks out 80% of the people.
And you are absolutely right that there is no data on all the people that didn't get caught. And of course they don't all come here. Just like all the people that do get caught don't appeal the decision. Again, I thought it would be self evident that I was encompassing both arguements yet focusing on the other poster's only stated research methodology coming from this board. Once again, I guess I wasn't clear.
All I can say is that because of the type of work I do, I see a great number of people who do get caught. I also see a few who got away with it but then again, there will a greater number of the former in my office because of the nature of my work. Seeing what I see in real life, when I'm on this forum I feel obliged to be cautionary and advise people of potential consequences. And in my original response, you will note that I never said that the poster's father would not get into Canada unchecked. In fact, I told them what he should do if he did get in. But I happen to think his chance of getting checked or at least questioned is much greater than not. There we can agree to disagree. Maybe he'll get lucky and then good for him. But I still think he should know the risk he's taking. And like you, I will never advise someone on here to lie to CBSA or CIC.
All of this will be a moot point eventually once Canada implements wider issuance of biometric passports. There's also been greater chatter about passport exit controls but we will see about that.
Re: BCPNP n Salary problm
Hello
i was reading the treads ,and i got u email id from that, i need u help and guide lines
i m on twp in canada 4 last 2 years in catagory c but my employer gave me promosion letter as supervisor to apply for pnp,bc, the pnp offices came at my work after 20 weeks to take my n my employer interview ,everything did well after that the sent email in office asking abt my salary ,the office lady sent back by writing $12 that was in contract in my c category but my employer wrote $21 in my promotion letter of supervisor ,what will be next ,
may they reject my case due to low salary
plz help
Hello
i was reading the treads ,and i got u email id from that, i need u help and guide lines
i m on twp in canada 4 last 2 years in catagory c but my employer gave me promosion letter as supervisor to apply for pnp,bc, the pnp offices came at my work after 20 weeks to take my n my employer interview ,everything did well after that the sent email in office asking abt my salary ,the office lady sent back by writing $12 that was in contract in my c category but my employer wrote $21 in my promotion letter of supervisor ,what will be next ,
may they reject my case due to low salary
plz help
