Dependent Child, join here!!!

[mmacedo]

Thanks Amy612, good to know. My visa office is Sao Paulo and it's quite fast. But CPC-M is slower now and we are planning for them to come by beginning of Oct. I'll check out TRV and TRP.

Thanks again,

Marcos

 

[badicioiu]

I have asked one of CIC agents and he said it's possible for a child with a sponsorship application in progress to get a TRV; they usually do not refuse TRVs to children.
I'll let you know if I got the TRV for my baby or not. Probably is better to apply after the sponsorship has been approved, but only proof of funds is required by the TRV.
More about dual intent can be found on OP11 manual, 5.4 paragraph.

 

[mmacedo]

Hey Badicioiu, have you already applied for TRV to your child? Any news? I guess I'll apply by beginning of August, but I haven't got sponsor approval yet.

Marcos

 

[badicioiu]

Hey Badicioiu, have you already applied for TRV to your child? Any news? I guess I'll apply by beginning of August, but I haven't got sponsor approval yet.

Marcos

Yes, I have already applied and I'm still waiting and hoping that the positive answer will come soon. I didn't wait for the sponsorship to be approved, I just provided an employment letter.
As I read on official documents available on CIC website, having an application for PR in progress IS NOT in itself a reason for TRV refusal. And the real issue here is the officer to be convinced like in any other TRV cases that the person in question would not overstay the TRV or become an illegal immigrant. But in the situation like ours, when both parents are legal PRs, for what reason in the world would anybody want his/her baby to be illegal and subject to deportation?

 

[mmacedo]

Yes, I do agree. I'm sending to my wife my employment letter, my PR Card photocopy and a letter of invitation in order to be attached to my daughter's TRV application. In the letter I clearly state that my daughter won't stay in Canada without a legal status. My wife will submit the application as soon as she receives this. We won't wait for sponsor approval as well.

Good luck to us!

 

[badicioiu]

Don't forget to add proofs that you have submitted the sponsorship application as well. Otherwise they may believe that you are misrepresenting the situation.

 

[mmacedo]

Don't forget to add proofs that you have submitted the sponsorship application as well. Otherwise they may believe that you are misrepresenting the situation.

Yes, great idea! Will include Canada Post receipt, delivery tracking report, sponsorship fee payment receipt and medical exams report. Will keep you posted!

 

[badicioiu]

Marcos, news are not good, I got refused. Reason - family ties , "you did not convince me...", "you are an intended migrant" , etc.... The last one is not even a valid reason, but probably the officer doesn't know. Being educated, having a highly qualified job, paying thousands of dollars each month taxes, having got all kind of Canada visas before, wasn't enough for this visa officer to be convinced I will respect the immigration law. Maybe you will be lucky.

 

[mmacedo]

I am sorry to hear that . I wish you all the best with your sponsorship application.

I just sent the documents to my wife. I guess she'll receive by end of next week and then will submit our daughter's TRV application.

 

[Amy612]

Marcos, news are not good, I got refused. Reason - family ties , "you did not convince me...", "you are an intended migrant" , etc.... The last one is not even a valid reason, but probably the officer doesn't know. Being educated, having a highly qualified job, paying thousands of dollars each month taxes, having got all kind of Canada visas before, wasn't enough for this visa officer to be convinced I will respect the immigration law. Maybe you will be lucky.

I am soo sorry to hear that. Actually the same happened to me for my son(14months). My suggestion is after the sponsorship approval apply for TRP not TRV. I am confident that you will get it..All the best.

 

[badicioiu]

I'm not so sure that TRP will do the job.
TRP is for an inadmissible person, but this is not the case. My daughter was never declared inadmissible from a reason or another.
There are two reasons for refusal in their letter:
-I did not convince the officer that I'll not break the immigration laws
-My daughter is an intended migrant.
The last one is not even a valid reason, this officer has made a mistake. Here is an excerpt from their own website:

"An applicant applies for a temporary resident visa (TRV) to visit Canada but is denied solely because they have a family class application for permanent residence in process. In the refusal letter, the officer states that because the applicant is pursuing permanent residence, the officer is not satisfied that the applicant will leave Canada at the end of the period authorized as required by A20(1)(b). The officer has made an error. A22(2) precludes denying an application for temporary status on the basis that there is an outstanding permanent resident application, if the officer believes that the applicant will leave Canada at the end of the period authorized for their stay. If the permanent resident application is finalized after the issuance of the TRV, the applicant would be authorized, on the basis of the permanent resident visa, to remain in Canada."

It'a very clear connection between the two reasons invoked by VO, otherwise he would have invoked only the first one. The only thing that made the office to believe the first one is the second one.
And this is an error, as publicized by them.

 

[mmacedo]

The last one is not even a valid reason, this officer has made a mistake.

Do you think about submitting an appeal?

 

[Amy612]

I'm not so sure that TRP will do the job.
TRP is for an inadmissible person, but this is not the case. My daughter was never declared inadmissible from a reason or another.
There are two reasons for refusal in their letter:
-I did not convince the officer that I'll not break the immigration laws
-My daughter is an intended migrant.

I am telling you about TRP because I know few cases who were refused TRV (Minor dependent child), were granted TRP later. They were refused TRV before the sponsorship application for the same reason like you. After getting approval, they again applied for TRP and got it. I don't know the PR processing time in your visa office. If it's too long, then you may try for TRP. I am thinking of applying for TRP for my son if I don't get PPR within two months. Best of luck.

 

[badicioiu]

Do you think about submitting an appeal?

Unfortunately there is no formal appeal; but I read somewhere that a justice action would be possible, if you have reasons to believe that they did not follow the procedures.
An for me it looks like this, seeing this "You are an intended migrant". They wouldn't have mentioned at all if it didn't count for them. I firmly believe that this was the only real reason of refusal. And is a mistake.

 

[badicioiu]

I am telling you about TRP because I know few cases who were refused TRV (Minor dependent child), were granted TRP later. They were refused TRV before the sponsorship application for the same reason like you. After getting approval, they again applied for TRP and got it. I don't know the PR processing time in your visa office. If it's too long, then you may try for TRP. I am thinking of applying for TRP for my son if I don't get PPR within two months. Best of luck.

Well, I understand to refuse a TRV if at least one of the parents IS NOT in Canada or before the sponsorship. But I am in Canada, I applied for sponsorship, and even if I had not applied is very legitimate to be visited by my family, being daughter, parents or whatever.
What I plan to do right now is to write them an e-mail explaining why I applied for a TRV and showing them the excerpts in their operating manuals.
Maybe somebody will consider that an error was made and they will acknowledge the error. Not many chances, but it may worth to try.

I also applied for CAIPS which must clearly show the officer reasoning (OP 11):
"Officers are reminded to use their own judgment and the flexibility afforded to them by A22(2)
when making decisions in cases with a dual intent aspect. CAIPS and FOSS notes should clearly
demonstrate the officer’s reasoning when assessing a case."
I'm really curious how the officer justified his decision.