cempjwi
Hero Member
- Mar 14, 2012
- 450
- 30
- Category........
- FAM
- Visa Office......
- CPP-Ottawa
- App. Filed.......
- 31-Jul-12
- Doc's Request.
- 09-Feb-13; Sent 13-Mar-13
- AOR Received.
- 15-Oct-12; In-process 26-Mar-13
- File Transfer...
- 15-Oct-12
- Med's Request
- 02-Apr-13 Chest Xray Only
- Med's Done....
- 14-May-12; 04-Apr-13 (Delivered 15-Apr-13)
- Interview........
- Waived
- Passport Req..
- 19-Apr-2013
- VISA ISSUED...
- 19-Apr-2013 (Rcvd May 15th, 2013)
- LANDED..........
- 1-July-2013
OhCanadiana said:This is a common misunderstanding (some of CIC's websites are confusing too) but step 1 is only a 'recommendation' for sponsorship. The VO is the one who has to approve the entire application on its merits at the time they take the decision. IP-2 has the details in the appendix splitting out the responsibilities.
That being said,
Agree. A timeline/description is usually sufficient proof of intent to return if it's well thought out. Apparently, it became common practice for people to use PRs instead of TRVs when married to Canadians (in countries where TRVs are difficult to attain).
True. I was refering to the fact the the VO agent did not add anything to his quoting paragraph 130(1). Nothing addressing 130(2), no request to proof intent, nothing at all, as if a Canadian citizen living abroad could not be a sponsor. If that were the case, CPC-M would have not given a 'recommendation to sponsor' whatsoever.