APPLICATION WILL REACH AFTER 1 JAN, 400 FEE PAID

[kumbu.bumbu]

Well, it doesn't make sense but that is the procedure CIC followed earlier. Give a search here and you will find many posts attesting to what I said or just wait for a month to see more new posts coming again.

As CIC follows everything that makes sense!!! CIC agents have enough knowledge!!!!!!
We have seen the new email AOR procedure to confirm the sense and knowledge.

 

[IllaBee]

Thanks it was hard to figure out the meaning

thanks Raman_ram.

 

[IllaBee]

Well, it does or doesn't make sense but that is the procedure CIC followed earlier. Give a search here and you will find many posts attesting to what I said or just wait for a month to see more new posts coming again.

I guess we'll just wait and see what happens. I hope you see the logic in my previous statement though, because the new fees take effect January 1st 2015 as stated by CIC, however application was sent before that date with the current correct fee. They are smart enough to know which applications to send back because of incorrect fees.

Hoping the best for all.

Thanks.

 

[IcogitoErgoSum]

CIC says: "Effective January 1, 2015 at 12:01am, Citizenship processing fees for adult grant applications will increase from $300 to $530". This
means, in my book, that if the application date on your application form is Jan 1, 2015 or after, you have to pay the incresed fee, regardless of the date application is received by the CIC. Also, the update on the CIC website is on Jan 1, 2015, thus even if you wanted to pay $630 on, say, Dec 29, you couldn't since there wasn't any option, but the regular $400.

Also, CIC says that: "Incomplete applications returned prior to January 1, 2015 and received by CIC after the fee increase will require the new processing fee." Meaning that if you sent it before Jan 1, 2015 but for some reason it's comomplete, they will return it to you, and on the re-send, you will have to pay the increased fee. So, if postal stamp is Dec 31, 2014 on your application, and all is complete, I'm of the opinion that they will process it with the $400 fee. Or at least that is what seems correct to do.

Good luck!

 

[kumbu.bumbu]

CIC says: "Effective January 1, 2015 at 12:01am, Citizenship processing fees for adult grant applications will increase from $300 to $530". This
means, in my book, that if the application date on your application form is Jan 1, 2015 or after, you have to pay the incresed fee, regardless of the date application is received by the CIC. Also, the update on the CIC website is on Jan 1, 2015, thus even if you wanted to pay $630 on, say, Dec 29, you couldn't since there wasn't any option, but the regular $400.

Also, CIC says that: "Incomplete applications returned prior to January 1, 2015 and received by CIC after the fee increase will require the new processing fee." Meaning that if you sent it before Jan 1, 2015 but for some reason it's comomplete, they will return it to you, and on the re-send, you will have to pay the increased fee. So, if postal stamp is Dec 31, 2014 on your application, and all is complete, I'm of the opinion that they will process it with the $400 fee. Or at least that is what seems correct to do.

Good luck!

Exactly that is what I think as well. But there are posts from applicants who talked to intelligent agents who said it is the date received that matters not date signed and posted.

 

[IcogitoErgoSum]

Exactly that is what I think as well. But there are posts from applicants who talked to intelligent agents who said it is the date received that matters not date signed and posted.

Well, at least that will be the logical and correct thing to do...There is an updated table on the fees option where you can pay up the $230 difference if you already paid the $400, but i think it's for those that have not yet submited their applications as of Jan 1, 2015. Otherwise, it will really be an auwfully unjust policy to not take into consideration the postal stamp from 2014.

 

[thecoolguysam]

I suspect that they will only consider applications received after 1st January with new fees regardless of the signature date of October to December
CIC is pretty much aware that people can backdate in order to avoid additional fees of $230 and that's reason why they want applications received after 1st January 2015 to be considered for new fees regardless when it was signed.

Any applications received before 1st Jan would be old fees.

 

[IcogitoErgoSum]

I suspect that they will only consider applications received after 1st January with new fees regardless of the signature date of October to December
CIC is pretty much aware that people can backdate in order to avoid additional fees of $230 and that's reason why they want applications received after 1st January 2015 to be considered for new fees regardless when it was signed.

Any applications received before 1st Jan would be old fees.

Yes, you can backdate your application form, but you cannot backdate the postal stamp. So, the fact that you sent it before Jan 1, 2015 and the postal stamp proves that, and considering that the option to pay $630 was not even active on the website (in 2014, at the time of expedition), isn't it logical and fair to consider it a 2014 application that's stuck in traffic? Same thing happens when , say, you have 30 days to respond officially to a notice of rent increase form your landlord: you have 30 days to send the response so what matters is the date on the postal stamp, cause you can't control the postal operations.

REMEMBER, PEOPLE: THIS THREAD IS FOR THOSE WHO ALREADY SENT THEIR APPLICATION BEFORE 2015 BUT HAVE NOT YET REACHED THE SYDNEY OFFICE!

 

[zardoz]

Historically, CIC has ALWAYS gone by the date of receipt at the CIC processing centre, regardless of signing or shipping date. This is considered to be the lock-in date. "Fairness" has nothing to do with it.

 

[IcogitoErgoSum]

Historically, CIC has ALWAYS gone by the date of receipt at the CIC processing centre, regardless of signing or shipping date. This is considered to be the lock-in date. "Fairness" has nothing to do with it.

Hmm...and I have naively thought that the government of the people, for the people, will have something to do with fairness, at least tangentially. I guess I was wrong!

 

[zardoz]

Hmm...and I have naively thought that the government of the people, for the people, will have something to do with fairness, at least tangentially. I guess I was wrong!

It's the first time that CIC has any control over the application. This is why they unilaterally make it the lock-in date. It's also the reason that they provide a top-up payment facility. This is exactly what happened the last time that the fees increased.

 

[IcogitoErgoSum]

It's the first time that CIC has any control over the application. This is why they unilaterally make it the lock-in date. It's also the reason that they provide a top-up payment facility. This is exactly what happened the last time that the fees increased.

I get it! It's what they do. Still, it's not fair! (for which you don't seem to have any opinion)

 

[zardoz]

I get it! It's what they do. Still, it's not fair! (for which you don't seem to have any opinion)

I'm not authorized to have an opinion. ;D I only state the observed operating procedures. It is, however, the way that CIC treats all applications, regardless of the process being applied for.

 

[thecoolguysam]

Here is the link for fees:
I hope it clarifies all the confusion;


http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/tools/fees/cit/citizenship.asp

 

[zardoz]

Also http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/tools/cit/admin/general/accept.asp