Application changed to BG Check: Not Applicable after PFL Response

[iwantmoreplanes]

My CEC app has been processing for over a year now. Recently, they sent me a PFL with concerns regarding my common law status. They had some confusion regarding the relationship timelines which I clarified with the help of a lawyer. I sent the response some ten days ago.

Now, I checked my secure account and the BG check updated from “we will send you a message when we start your background check” to “not applicable”.

Is this a good sign? The PFL was quite serious with mentioning misrepresentation so I would like to be assured they accepted my explanation.

 

[scylla]

My CEC app has been processing for over a year now. Recently, they sent me a PFL with concerns regarding my common law status. They had some confusion regarding the relationship timelines which I clarified with the help of a lawyer. I sent the response some ten days ago.

Now, I checked my secure account and the BG check updated from “we will send you a message when we start your background check” to “not applicable”.

Is this a good sign? The PFL was quite serious with mentioning misrepresentation so I would like to be assured they accepted my explanation.

I don't think you can be assured they accept your explanation until you have an actual approval.

 

[iwantmoreplanes]

I don't think you can be assured they accept your explanation until you have an actual approval.

Well, obviously we won’t know for sure until approval, but my process of thought was that if they wanted to refuse me, they would have done it right off the bat. There are some data points suggesting Not applicable at this stage means the application is in the process of being finalized (IP2 -> NA3). I don’t know if these statuses mean anything anymore as the data points are quite old, though, so I thought to ask.

 

[scylla]

Well, obviously we won’t know for sure until approval, but my process of thought was that if they wanted to refuse me, they would have done it right off the bat. There are some data points suggesting Not applicable at this stage means the application is in the process of being finalized (IP2 -> NA3). I don’t know if these statuses mean anything anymore as the data points are quite old, though, so I thought to ask.

It's tricky with PFLs. Sometimes IRCC comes to a decision right away and other times it can take many months (in rare occasion, over a year). Refusals are definitely not always right off the bat and can in some cases come much later. Something you could try doing is ordering GCMS notes now. It will take them some time to arrive however once you have them, you should be able to understand the status of the PFL and your response more clearly.

 

[iwantmoreplanes]

I called them and there were no new notes on the file. However, they could see that a lower-rank employee (not an officer) added my common law partner to my file this morning. However, they added them as accompanying, as confirmed by the phone agent and visible in my secure account as a dependent. They have not asked for a fee nor documents. I explicitly stated, more than once, in unambiguous terms, in all communications with them, that my partner would be non-accompanying.

It feels like they botched this one. Has anyone experienced this?

 

[canuck78]

I called them and there were no new notes on the file. However, they could see that a lower-rank employee (not an officer) added my common law partner to my file this morning. However, they added them as accompanying, as confirmed by the phone agent and visible in my secure account as a dependent. They have not asked for a fee nor documents. I explicitly stated, more than once, in unambiguous terms, in all communications with them, that my partner would be non-accompanying.

It feels like they botched this one. Has anyone experienced this?

Are they in Canada?

 

[iwantmoreplanes]

Are they in Canada?

Yes, they are, on a PGWP.

At time of app we did not qualify as common law yet (less than 1y cohab). I added her later via web form as non-accompanying. I don’t think they read that based on the PFL wording.

 

[scylla]

I called them and there were no new notes on the file. However, they could see that a lower-rank employee (not an officer) added my common law partner to my file this morning. However, they added them as accompanying, as confirmed by the phone agent and visible in my secure account as a dependent. They have not asked for a fee nor documents. I explicitly stated, more than once, in unambiguous terms, in all communications with them, that my partner would be non-accompanying.

It feels like they botched this one. Has anyone experienced this?

The contact centre doesn't have access to all of the application details and frankly give out a lot of wrong information. So they may have been wrong about how your common law partner is listed in the application. Having said that, if you want your partner to be non-accompanying, send a web form to confirm this. I'm assuming you are aware that your partner will need to complete the medical, PCC, etc. regardless of whether they are accompanying or non-accompanying.

 

[canuck78]

Yes, they are, on a PGWP.

At time of app we did not qualify as common law yet (less than 1y cohab). I added her later via web form as non-accompanying. I don’t think they read that based on the PFL wording.

You should clarify but IRCC also does seem to be cracking down on those living in Canada listing their partners as non-accompanying to increase their scores.

 

[iwantmoreplanes]

You should clarify but IRCC also does seem to be cracking down on those living in Canada listing their partners as non-accompanying to increase their scores.

My lawyer actually advised me to wait for a formal communication before taking any action.

Besides, my score was like 200 points over the minimum for the round (it was the French round with very low cut-off), and my partner has Canadian education and English proficiency.

 

[canuck78]

My lawyer actually advised me to wait for a formal communication before taking any action.

Besides, my score was like 200 points over the minimum for the round (it was the French round with very low cut-off), and my partner has Canadian education and English proficiency.

Unclear what the issue is then if processed as accompanying. Typically the issue is about scores being reassessed if partner is listed as accompanying.