Sponsoring my Common Law Partner separately from her Dependents

[WorldSeriesG7]

Hello everyone,

I am a Canadian Citizen born here trying to sponsor my common-law partner. We have been together for almost 3 years now and will start are cohabitation phase to prove genuine relationship. She has two dependent children from a previous marriage, she has her divorce certificate. Their ages 7 and 9, her children are on visitor visa's in Canada with her currently. I'm trying to sponsor her separately from her children. We plan to sponsor her children once she receives her PR from my sponsorship. We will list her children as non-accompanying and provide all the necessary documentation stating that. Including the medical examinations required for them. We plan to update the status of their visa's as we wait for my partners PR.

My question is, is this allowed? Is this a common way people have submitted PR applications involving children? Will the IRCC look at this case and question the authenticity of our relationship? Has anybody gone through or helped with similar cases such as this, and if so what did the whole process look like? Or is this a straight forward approach. If anyone can weigh in with experience and potential complications that we can be facing with this approach that would be greatly appreciated. I can provide more information if needed. Thank you so much.

 

[Ponga]

Do you fully understand how the process works for sponsoring a spouse or common-law partner with children?

What is her current status in Canada?

Regarding her children, when you state that you plan to `update the status of their visa's as we wait for my partners PR.', that simply means that she will apply to extend their visitor status, which is NOT guaranteed to be approved. Hopefully, it will be but what will she do if it is not approved?


Firstly, you mention that you have `been together' for almost 3 years, but are you just now starting the required cohabitation period BEFORE she can even apply to be sponsored? On the day that she submits the application (actually you each submit your respective applications; your sponsor portion and her applicant portion) you MUST have lived together for a minimum of 365 days. This is non-negotiable.

Regarding her children, you seem to understand that she MUST declare that she has children and provide information about them, even though they will not be included in your sponsorship of her. If she were to fail do this, she may never be able to sponsor them!

Also, be mindful that things often change in terms of sponsoring family members (including children), so hopefully when you both are ready to sponsor her children, it will still be possible.

Good luck.

 

[canuck78]

Hello everyone,

I am a Canadian Citizen born here trying to sponsor my common-law partner. We have been together for almost 3 years now and will start are cohabitation phase to prove genuine relationship. She has two dependent children from a previous marriage, she has her divorce certificate. Their ages 7 and 9, her children are on visitor visa's in Canada with her currently. I'm trying to sponsor her separately from her children. We plan to sponsor her children once she receives her PR from my sponsorship. We will list her children as non-accompanying and provide all the necessary documentation stating that. Including the medical examinations required for them. We plan to update the status of their visa's as we wait for my partners PR.

My question is, is this allowed? Is this a common way people have submitted PR applications involving children? Will the IRCC look at this case and question the authenticity of our relationship? Has anybody gone through or helped with similar cases such as this, and if so what did the whole process look like? Or is this a straight forward approach. If anyone can weigh in with experience and potential complications that we can be facing with this approach that would be greatly appreciated. I can provide more information if needed. Thank you so much.

Would add by listing the children as non-accompanying while in Canada you could also be denied due to misrepresentation which could also include a ban of 5 years. You appear to have done minimal research about immigration and should seek out the help of a professional if you are not able to research family sponsorship. Your partner and her children appear to be trying to live in Canada while visitors which should already be problematic. Assume they don’t have study permits but you’re expecting them to remain in Canada and attend school? How long has your partner and her children been in Canada?

 

[WorldSeriesG7]

Do you fully understand how the process works for sponsoring a spouse or common-law partner with children?

What is her current status in Canada?

Regarding her children, when you state that you plan to `update the status of their visa's as we wait for my partners PR.', that simply means that she will apply to extend their visitor status, which is NOT guaranteed to be approved. Hopefully, it will be but what will she do if it is not approved?


Firstly, you mention that you have `been together' for almost 3 years, but are you just now starting the required cohabitation period BEFORE she can even apply to be sponsored? On the day that she submits the application (actually you each submit your respective applications; your sponsor portion and her applicant portion) you MUST have lived together for a minimum of 365 days. This is non-negotiable.

Regarding her children, you seem to understand that she MUST declare that she has children and provide information about them, even though they will not be included in your sponsorship of her. If she were to fail do this, she may never be able to sponsor them!

Also, be mindful that things often change in terms of sponsoring family members (including children), so hopefully when you both are ready to sponsor her children, it will still be possible.

Good luck

She currently has a work visa that expires in 2028.

What would be the reasons for extension of her childrens visas? Their just attending school and being in the country with her mother.

We will cohabit for 365 days first and then begin our PR application. But we have been together in a relationship for 3 years.

I understand that this path to sponsoring her and her children can be riskier but I do not want to be the sole person responsible to sponsor her children although I would be very supportive in helping her achieve that. Is this still a logical approach to go about this scenario?

 

[WorldSeriesG7]

Would add by listing the children as non-accompanying while in Canada you could also be denied due to misrepresentation which could also include a ban of 5 years. You appear to have done minimal research about immigration and should seek out the help of a professional if you are not able to research family sponsorship. Your partner and her children appear to be trying to live in Canada while visitors which should already be problematic. Assume they don’t have study permits but you’re expecting them to remain in Canada and attend school? How long has your partner and her children been in Canada?

I read that you can list dependents and spouses as non-accompanying although they reside in Canada. Correct me if i'm wrong but non-accompanying means that the person is not applying for their PR during this specific application process but will intend to apply for PR in the future. My partner is currently on a work visa which expires in 2028. Her children already attend school here in Ontario, Canada. My partner has been here for almost 4-5 years now, her children around 3 years.

 

[Ponga]

She currently has a work visa that expires in 2028.

What would be the reasons for extension of her childrens visas? Their just attending school and being in the country with her mother.

We will cohabit for 365 days first and then begin our PR application. But we have been together in a relationship for 3 years.

I understand that this path to sponsoring her and her children can be riskier but I do not want to be the sole person responsible to sponsor her children although I would be very supportive in helping her achieve that. Is this still a logical approach to go about this scenario?

At the risk of `parroting' another member in these forums (you know who you are, LOL!)...is marriage a viable option? If so, it would accelerate the sponsorship because until you have lived together for 365 days, she is not your common-law partner.

No need to validate your reason why, or why not to want to sponsor her children. It's important enough to understand that you will be financially responsible for her, for a period of time, commencing on the day she becomes a PR:
https://ircc.canada.ca/english/helpcentre/answer.asp?qnum=1355&top=14

 

[armoured]

I understand that this path to sponsoring her and her children can be riskier but I do not want to be the sole person responsible to sponsor her children although I would be very supportive in helping her achieve that. Is this still a logical approach to go about this scenario?

I for one do not understand - what exactly are you trying to achieve by having the children as non-accompanying? They clearly are intending to stay.

I read that you can list dependents and spouses as non-accompanying although they reside in Canada. Correct me if i'm wrong but non-accompanying means that the person is not applying for their PR during this specific application process but will intend to apply for PR in the future. My partner is currently on a work visa which expires in 2028. Her children already attend school here in Ontario, Canada. My partner has been here for almost 4-5 years now, her children around 3 years.

Non-accompanying does mean that you're not applying for PR status now but might in future - but it ALSO means you're saying the children do not intend to settle/remain in Canada at this time, i.e. that they will ... not accompany the parent. So unless they are leaving soon, it's clearly a nonsensical statement.

 

[Buletruck]

She currently has a work visa that expires in 2028.

What would be the reasons for extension of her childrens visas? Their just attending school and being in the country with her mother.

We will cohabit for 365 days first and then begin our PR application. But we have been together in a relationship for 3 years.

I understand that this path to sponsoring her and her children can be riskier but I do not want to be the sole person responsible to sponsor her children although I would be very supportive in helping her achieve that. Is this still a logical approach to go about this scenario?

I don't really see how, regardless of them being accompanying or not, that you are not the only one responsible for sponsoring both her and her children. The undertaking, and the financial obligation involved are the same. They are all listed on the same application. Unless, of course, the expectation is the relationship will only last until she becomes a PR and she undertakes the sponsorship after that time on her own.

 

[canuck78]

She currently has a work visa that expires in 2028.

What would be the reasons for extension of her childrens visas? Their just attending school and being in the country with her mother.

We will cohabit for 365 days first and then begin our PR application. But we have been together in a relationship for 3 years.

I understand that this path to sponsoring her and her children can be riskier but I do not want to be the sole person responsible to sponsor her children although I would be very supportive in helping her achieve that. Is this still a logical approach to go about this scenario?

Do the children actually qualify for a study permit? If not living in Canada without status could create a variety of issues now and in the longterm for them. If they qualify for a study permit they should get a study permit. Have they been without status for almost 3 years? You can’t sponsor a spouse without listing their dependents. If you are not comfortable sponsoring the children with their mom then you need to reassess your relationship. Many are now getting PFLs for trying to list family members as non-accompanying when they are actually accompanying and as previously stated they are in Canada so yes it would be an issue if they are listed as non-accompanying.