Mispresentation

[GKL]

Hello Everone ,
Need help !!

I got refused January 2, 2018 for mispresentation . It's section40 (1) a . I was confused that I'm banned or not . Then I have applied for CAIPS note . And got it after 4 weeks time . In the CAIPS note VO didn't mention that I'm banned . They have given explanation and said " refused A40 mispresentation " that's at . But still I'm confused I'm banned or not cause I wanna apply again with strong SOP . Can anyone let me know is the VO explained about the banned in the CAIPS note or not ? Looking forward to get a correct reply .

 

[Helican]

Hello Everone ,
Need help !!

I got refused January 2, 2018 for mispresentation . It's section40 (1) a . I was confused that I'm banned or not . Then I have applied for CAIPS note . And got it after 4 weeks time . In the CAIPS note VO didn't mention that I'm banned . They have given explanation and said " refused A40 mispresentation " that's at . But still I'm confused I'm banned or not cause I wanna apply again with strong SOP . Can anyone let me know is the VO explained about the banned in the CAIPS note or not ? Looking forward to get a correct reply .

What is written in the letter that you got after your visa was refused. Usually, they give time to provide explanation. Didnt you get a letter indicating that they think certain docs/info is not valid or not true and you need to provide explanation for that. The CAIPS Notes should definitely have something.

 

[bongoman]

If you were banned it would have said so in the letter, so you can apply but your previous refusal is still a big negative against you now.

 

[GKL]

What is written in the letter that you got after your visa was refused. Usually, they give time to provide explanation. Didnt you get a letter indicating that they think certain docs/info is not valid or not true and you need to provide explanation for that. The CAIPS Notes should definitely have something.

Dear helican ,

Many thanks for the quick reply , I want explain you in details so that you can advise me . Actually i was consult by a student consultancy firm who corrosponded everything with CIC on behalf of me , I wasn't aware of it , I got everything after I get refused . My consultancy firm provide a fradulent LOA to CIC and CIC caught it and asked for a explanation letter about , PFL sent 5th December 2017 , and my consultancy firm replied into that PFL to CIC and explained them that I got assistence from a friend who guide me wrong way which I I wasn't aware of it , explain lots of things and asked for apologize . After that 2nd January the application was refused . After that I ordered for CAIPS note . I review the CAIPS note and VO didn't not mention about banned . Let me tell you what VO gave a explanation .

VO note 2: 20/12/2017 -
Applicant submitted a confirmed fraudulent LOA to university of Lethbeidhe . PFL was issued outlining my concerns that the applicant wasn't truthful and engaged in misrepresentation of a material fact - that he had admitted to UofL. Applicant response - implying that it was his friends fault - does not disabuse me of my concerns . eligibility failed -A16 , purpose of visit - and misrepresentation recommended .

VO note 1 : 01/01/2018 (21:07:10)
Restricted : No
Label : General
Text : officer had concerns that the educational letter of acceptance produced is fradulent . PFL sent December 5, 2017 . Applicant responded by stating that he used a friend in Canada for assistance with his application and had no idea that there was any fraudulent information . Based on information provided , I'm not satisfied that the letter of acceptance is genuine . This is a material fact that could have induced an error in the administration of the act as it would lead an officer to believe that the client was genuinely accepted to study at a school in Canada thereby leading the officer to believe the client would leave Canada at the end of the period of authorized stay . Refused A40 Misrepresentation.


That's the note that the VO provide d . But they didn't about banned things in the whole note . Now pls advise me how can I know I'm banned or not , got little confusion about it .

Looking for a reply from you .

 

[GKL]

If you were banned it would have said so in the letter, so you can apply but your previous refusal is still a big negative against you now.

Thanks for the reply .

What is written in the letter that you got after your visa was refused. Usually, they give time to provide explanation. Didnt you get a letter indicating that they think certain docs/info is not valid or not true and you need to provide explanation for that. The CAIPS Notes should definitely have something.

Many thanks for the quick reply , I want to explain you in details so that you can advise me . Actually i was consult by a student consultancy firm who corrosponded everything with CIC on behalf of me , I wasn't aware of it , I got everything after I get refused . My consultancy firm provide a fradulent LOA to CIC and CIC caught it and asked for a explanation letter about , PFL sent 5th December 2017 , and my consultancy firm replied into that PFL to CIC and explained them that I got assistence from a friend who guide me wrong way which I I wasn't aware of it , explain lots of things and asked for apologize . After that 2nd January the application was refused . After that I ordered for CAIPS note . I review the CAIPS note and VO didn't not mention about banned . Let me tell you what VO gave a explanation .

VO note 2: 20/12/2017
Applicant submitted a confirmed fraudulent LOA to university of lethbridge . PFL was issued outlining my concerns that the applicant wasn't truthful and engaged in misrepresentation of a material fact - that he had admitted to UofL. Applicant response - implying that it was his friends fault - does not disabuse me of my concerns . eligibility failed -A16 , purpose of visit - and misrepresentation recommended .

VO note 1 : 01/01/2018 (21:07:10)
Restricted : No
Label : General
Text : officer had concerns that the educational letter of acceptance produced is fradulent . PFL sent December 5, 2017 . Applicant responded by stating that he used a friend in Canada for assistance with his application and had no idea that there was any fraudulent information . Based on information provided , I'm not satisfied that the letter of acceptance is genuine . This is a material fact that could have induced an error in the administration of the act as it would lead an officer to believe that the client was genuinely accepted to study at a school in Canada thereby leading the officer to believe the client would leave Canada at the end of the period of authorized stay . Refused A40 Misrepresentation.


That's the note that the VO provide d . But they didn't about banned things in the whole note . Now pls advise me how can I know I'm banned or not , got little confusion about it .

Looking for a reply from you .

 

[bongoman]

Like I said if you were banned it would clearly state so in the refusal, so you are not banned.

 

[Helican]

A

Thanks for the reply .



Many thanks for the quick reply , I want to explain you in details so that you can advise me . Actually i was consult by a student consultancy firm who corrosponded everything with CIC on behalf of me , I wasn't aware of it , I got everything after I get refused . My consultancy firm provide a fradulent LOA to CIC and CIC caught it and asked for a explanation letter about , PFL sent 5th December 2017 , and my consultancy firm replied into that PFL to CIC and explained them that I got assistence from a friend who guide me wrong way which I I wasn't aware of it , explain lots of things and asked for apologize . After that 2nd January the application was refused . After that I ordered for CAIPS note . I review the CAIPS note and VO didn't not mention about banned . Let me tell you what VO gave a explanation .

VO note 2: 20/12/2017
Applicant submitted a confirmed fraudulent LOA to university of lethbridge . PFL was issued outlining my concerns that the applicant wasn't truthful and engaged in misrepresentation of a material fact - that he had admitted to UofL. Applicant response - implying that it was his friends fault - does not disabuse me of my concerns . eligibility failed -A16 , purpose of visit - and misrepresentation recommended .

VO note 1 : 01/01/2018 (21:07:10)
Restricted : No
Label : General
Text : officer had concerns that the educational letter of acceptance produced is fradulent . PFL sent December 5, 2017 . Applicant responded by stating that he used a friend in Canada for assistance with his application and had no idea that there was any fraudulent information . Based on information provided , I'm not satisfied that the letter of acceptance is genuine . This is a material fact that could have induced an error in the administration of the act as it would lead an officer to believe that the client was genuinely accepted to study at a school in Canada thereby leading the officer to believe the client would leave Canada at the end of the period of authorized stay . Refused A40 Misrepresentation.


That's the note that the VO provide d . But they didn't about banned things in the whole note . Now pls advise me how can I know I'm banned or not , got little confusion about it .

Looking for a reply from you .

All they are saying is that they are refusing your application due to misinterpretation. I dont think there is any ban. If you plan to apply again then better take help from a lawyer and this time make sure that you get the LOA directly from the university. Just google the program that you wish to study, visit the college's websites and apply. its easy.