Can your lawyer omit key information from your application without your consent?

[Zouk Princesse]

I was approached by a co-worker for some advice, given that we're both going through the immigration hassle, but I thought I'd reach out to you guys here for some input, so here's the story:

My co-worker, let's call her Candice, is married to a Canadian PR, she has a daughter (non-Canadian) overseas from a previous relationship. Candice recently got her PR through inland spousal sponsorship. During her landing interview, she inquired about her daughter's PR and was told that she was not on the application, and therefore not eligible for sponsorship. Candice is saying that the lawyer failed to include her daughter on the sponsorship application, even though he had all her information. Now I've never worked with an immigration lawyer before, but wouldn't the applicant have to sign off on all documents before submission? Given that this happened, what are her options? Can she re-apply and say that the lawyer omitted her daughter without her knowledge? Are there any alternative courses of action?

Also helpful to know...this is their second time applying for spousal PR. They apparently started the first application a few years ago, and for some reason had to re-submit. I don't know the details, but my suspicion is they somehow botched the first attempt and had to start over. Candice says her daughter was definitely on that first application, so she assumed the lawyer would have naturally included her the second time around.

Any thoughts?

 

[scylla]

Her only option for sponsoring her daughter is H&C.

From CIC's perspective, it doesn't matter who failed to include her daughter on the application. Candice is 100% responsible for this omission. When she signed the forms, she was confirming that all information contained was accurate. She should have reviewed all of the documentation before signing to ensure it was complete. But regardless of whether she did or did not review all of the forms, she is still responsible for the omission.

 

[KJG]

I was approached by a co-worker for some advice, given that we're both going through the immigration hassle, but I thought I'd reach out to you guys here for some input, so here's the story:

My co-worker, let's call her Candice, is married to a Canadian PR, she has a daughter (non-Canadian) overseas from a previous relationship. Candice recently got her PR through inland spousal sponsorship. During her landing interview, she inquired about her daughter's PR and was told that she was not on the application, and therefore not eligible for sponsorship. Candice is saying that the lawyer failed to include her daughter on the sponsorship application, even though he had all her information. Now I've never worked with an immigration lawyer before, but wouldn't the applicant have to sign off on all documents before submission? Given that this happened, what are her options? Can she re-apply and say that the lawyer omitted her daughter without her knowledge? Are there any alternative courses of action?

Also helpful to know...this is their second time applying for spousal PR. They apparently started the first application a few years ago, and for some reason had to re-submit. I don't know the details, but my suspicion is they somehow botched the first attempt and had to start over. Candice says her daughter was definitely on that first application, so she assumed the lawyer would have naturally included her the second time around.

Any thoughts?

The applicant and sponsor has to sign all documents and a medical would have been required for her daughter so I don't know how she could have missed the fact that the lawyer did not include her and why she would not confirm with the lawyer when signing everything that her daughter was included in the application. Sorry your friend's story just does not sound viable. The lawyer may have used some info from the first documents but there would have been a lot of updates and the lawyer would only have used what he was given.

 

[Zouk Princesse]

Thanks guys, I'm thinking the same. I mean short of her signing blank forms, handing them to the lawyer, and never looking back, I really don't see how this situation could have even occurred. I asked her a couple times, but she's insisting it's the lawyer's fault for failing to include her daughter.

Is H&C even a viable option here? Or would the judge just throw it out as carelessness?

 

[scylla]

Unfortunately it doesn't matter what she thinks and if the lawyer was the one who excluded her daughter. CIC will hold her responsible. And CIC's opinion is really the only one that matters here.

There's a chance H&C will succeed and there's a chance H&C will fail. Who knows how great a chance on either side. There's also somewhat of a danger in submitting the H&C. By excluding her daughter from the application, she technically committed misrepresentation and the H&C application will bring attention to this. Misrepresentation is sometimes punished by canceling the person's PR status.

It would be interesting to know why the first application didn't work out. I agree there's probably more to this story than your coworker is telling you.

 

[hogaishaadi]

Lawyers are known to make mistakes... She or the ppl themselves are responsible for all info filed once they sign the forms

 

[Zouk Princesse]

Thanks for your input guys. I will let her know about the H&C route and the inherent risks there. I really have no idea what happened the first time around, just that it was "messed up". I do know it didn't get far enough to where a decision was made, but that's about it.