eTA declined due to traffic charge

[James_NZ1]

Hello

I've applied for a tourist visa to enter Canada. A eTA is required as I'm from New Zealand. I have a traffic charge dated back 2011. In 2012 I entered Canada on a working holiday visa. I provided this information to IRCC at the time of application and was considered admissable to Canada. I entered Canada for my working holiday and no problems. I entered Canada again but by road in 2014 with my Fiance to visit family for Christmas. I was not asked about my criminal background, yet they knew as it would be there on the system.

I have applied for a eTA and it has been declined and the reasons are the charge is considered 10 years in jail. The charge in New Zealand would not even be near 10 years in jail and I was admissible for a work visa with them knowing about this charge.

The letter says I can re apply if I have new information. I'm getting as much info from NZ Police and courts as I can but how is it I can enter in 2012 but not now?

Does any one know how to deal with this?

Thank you

 

[onkarsharan]

Hello

I've applied for a tourist visa to enter Canada. A eTA is required as I'm from New Zealand. I have a traffic charge dated back 2011. In 2012 I entered Canada on a working holiday visa. I provided this information to IRCC at the time of application and was considered admissable to Canada. I entered Canada for my working holiday and no problems. I entered Canada again but by road in 2014 with my Fiance to visit family for Christmas. I was not asked about my criminal background, yet they knew as it would be there on the system.

I have applied for a eTA and it has been declined and the reasons are the charge is considered 10 years in jail. The charge in New Zealand would not even be near 10 years in jail and I was admissible for a work visa with them knowing about this charge.

The letter says I can re apply if I have new information. I'm getting as much info from NZ Police and courts as I can but how is it I can enter in 2012 but not now?

Does any one know how to deal with this?

Thank you

Sorry,

Just out of inquisition, was the accident in NZ or CA? And if I may ask, what was the traffic incident that carried 10 years?!

 

[fireal.jon]

I'm not sure how you were admissible on your original IEC visa. Seems that even ppl with low end DWI's have trouble obtaining visas or residency. CIC & CBSA appear to have zero tolerance on criminal convictions. I'm not sure, you might need to consult a Canadian immigration lawyer on this issue.

 

[James_NZ1]

Sorry,

Just out of inquisition, was the accident in NZ or CA? And if I may ask, what was the traffic incident that carried 10 years?!

Hi the accident took place in New Zealand. The maximum sentence handed down to most offenders is 6 month driving disqualification, a fine of up to $750 and that's it. If i refer to the Ontario traffic act it's exactly the same sentence. The maximum jail time in Ontario is 3 years or 6 months.

I'm not sure what they are referring to as 10 years. The accident that took place is something we all do everyday a traffic u-turn. Only on a few occasions does it end up in court and that's because an accident took place.

 

[James_NZ1]

I'm not sure how you were admissible on your original IEC visa. Seems that even ppl with low end DWI's have trouble obtaining visas or residency. CIC & CBSA appear to have zero tolerance on criminal convictions. I'm not sure, you might need to consult a Canadian immigration lawyer on this issue.

I applied to be admissible to Canada and submitted court documents, two references and police background checks. I was allowed to enter Canada under the work visa category. Why though do I have to go through all this if I've already been to Canada with this charge known to them?

 

[Bryanna]

I applied to be admissible to Canada and submitted court documents, two references and police background checks. I was allowed to enter Canada under the work visa category. Why though do I have to go through all this if I've already been to Canada with this charge known to them?

We've seen this happen before although it's quite rare. Someone has been allowed to visit or even to work/apply for PR.... and a few years after they first visited, IRCC determined that the first visa/ first entry was incorrectly allowed because the person was inadmissible due to an XYZ reason. Maybe the visa officer who assessed the first visa application missed seeing the grounds for inadmissibility