August 2018 AOR - join here
- Thread starter andy108
- Start date
This is allowed. I had applied via an attorney and my attorney did this for me too. He added my spouse to my application after I got the ITA.
So I had applied without my spouse as “accompanying” when I got the ITA. However, I changed spouse to “accompanying” afterwards and submitted all of my spouse’s documentation when I submitted my documentation for the AOR. My score actually reduced after adding my spouse since we didn’t get an ECA done for my spouse nor did my spouse give the IELTS. My score when I got the ITA was high enough and my attorney was confident that even if I add my spouse without ECA/IELTS, my reduced score would still be above the cut off for my draw. So long as your revised score (after adding your spouse) is above the cut off for that particular draw in which you were picked, you are good.
In my case, the issue was that no IELTS dates were available in my city for over 2.5 months. So there was no question of my spouse taking the IELTS. We would’ve missed the submission deadline. We considered getting the ECA done since spouse had a Masters - but the attorney told us we were sufficiently above the margin even without it. So we didn’t bother.
This isn’t a big deal and it is very much permitted.
Why did not you check if spouse accompanying without ECA and IELTS got you the ITA beforehand . If it doesn't fall above the cut-off of the round, you could get rejected.
Please understand that when people do not add their spouse’s as accompanying, it is not always to get a “higher score”. Score is not the only driver.
In my case, my spouse could not move out of the US for at least 2-3 years due to some work commitments. If she got her PR with me and didn’t move within that time frame, her PR would have lapsed. So I decided to sponsor her later on - a couple of years after I moved to Canada.
However, by the time I got my ITA (actually it was roughly a month after the ITA date), she was able to negotiate with her employer that they would allow her to work from their Canadian office after a year or so. There was no written commitment from them - but she’s worked at the same company for years and we are confident they’ll live up to their commitment. So I added her because now it seemed possible for her to move.
I was confident that my score wouldn’t fall below the cut-off even without her ECA/IELTS. My attorney and I had done calculations in advance of the possible score if I add her without ECA/IELTS.
As I had mentioned earlier, I had a sufficiently high score on my ITA and that is why I took the chance. I had enough margin and we had calculated it in advance. There wasn’t a possibility of my score falling below the cut-off. It was a well-thought out decision. We weren’t taking random chances. Hope this explains it.
On her part, now that we have got the PR, the employer has already started the process of transferring her to their Canadian office. It won’t happen immediately but we’re expecting it to go through within a few months. It’s an internal process with her company. These kinds of things move at their own pace and we simply didn’t have much visibility into her possibility of moving when I had got my ITA.
Last edited:
118 days and counting.
From call got to know visa office NDVO.
Ordered GCMS notes nov 19....
speechless.................................
From call got to know visa office NDVO.
Ordered GCMS notes nov 19....
speechless.................................
108 days and counting. IP2 for 33 days.
Eligibility still in progress. Security yet to start.
goot that you are in IP2 atleast. i am still IP1.
your visa office NDVO too?
not sure how fast this office is.
Visa Office Ottawa. But thats also slow now.
NDVO is quite slow similarly Sydney and London unfortunately.
My IP2 is only coz criminality is passed. Security is still pending and eligibility on going.
your case seems good then.
visa officers at NDVO seems to have gotten addicted to having samosa and chai with paan at the end, making them take lots of breaks. No other reason seems to explain their slowness. Typical government organization.