Federal Skilled Worker Class Action Lawsuit

[Bboy]

Hi guys,
Can anyone please advise me how to track my application under FSW 2013? I have submitted my application which was received at CIC on July 1, 2013 and I haven't heard any response either from CIC, neither has fees been encashed from my account.

Thanks

 

[sheikh958]

Hi Bboy
when did u sent your application to CIC and when have they received your application.

 

[CanadianMaple]

Yes, they should be challenged for such big decisions as they affect big number of people. Also many PR renewals and citizenship applications are being RFI'd despite of having sufficient information provided in the application, there shall be some way to keep there RFIs in control so that people just don't get audited or harassed for the sake of higher numbers or negligence on CIC side.

 

[joe07]

Hi guys,
Can anyone please advise me how to track my application under FSW 2013? I have submitted my application which was received at CIC on July 1, 2013 and I haven't heard any response either from CIC, neither has fees been encashed from my account.

Thanks

you might hear from them after 60 days once the application has reached CIO..which means you will hear end of september

 

[Yza1218]

Hi guys, how can I apply for my CAIPS?

thanks

 

[Jewel1020]

LATEST MAIL FROM TIM

Dear Litigant,

One of you has asked me if I am willing to commence litigation along the lines that I mentioned before; viz., for those who have been paper-screened. I asked another lawyer if she would work with me in doing so because I do not want to file the cases under my name in order to avoid Justice Barnes halting the new litigation, too. I will, however, prepare the written submissions. Each case will have to proceed independently because the ruling will depend on who did the paper-screening. The fee would be $750 USD initially and, if successful, another $750.

In most cases, the person who did the paper-screening is not an officer. However, if s/he is an officer, s. 87.4(1) does not apply and the file will have to be processed. The first step would be having the CAIPS notes showing that paper-screening occurred. If so, we will assert that the person doing so is an officer; CIC will have to prove that the person is not an officer. If they cannot, the Court should order CIC to process the file.

I do not want to proceed initially with cases filed in Delhi because the visa post has so much volume I would expect it to have a cadre of clerks doing the paper-screening. If we get too many rejections initially, the Court will not take the other cases seriously. Therefore, I want to begin with the smaller visa posts where (a) officers may do both tasks and (b) promotion is possible. In my mind, it would not matter if the person who did the paper-screening was a clerk when s/he did so if, by 29 June 2012, s/he was an officer.

I will also be arguing that, even if the paper-screener was not an officer, as s/he was performing an officer's task, CIC must accept responsibility for having assigned an officer's task. So, we will have two arguments.

I am not particular optimistic that this litigation will succeed. However, I have always believed that the more people who speak up, the more likely a political solution will ensue. Now that we have a new minister, one who has not invested himself in the process, we might find a less hostile reception. But, it is a "shot in the dark". If you are willing to invest your money into the project, I will do my best to make it work.

Because written arguments will have to be prepared, served and filed for each case, another lawyer must be paid and a new $50 filing fee will be due, I will not be reducing the fee. It's your call.

Regards,

Tim



My question is that should we participate in this case ans is there change to win the same?

 

[PMM]

Hi

LATEST MAIL FROM TIM

Dear Litigant,

One of you has asked me if I am willing to commence litigation along the lines that I mentioned before; viz., for those who have been paper-screened. I asked another lawyer if she would work with me in doing so because I do not want to file the cases under my name in order to avoid Justice Barnes halting the new litigation, too. I will, however, prepare the written submissions. Each case will have to proceed independently because the ruling will depend on who did the paper-screening. The fee would be $750 USD initially and, if successful, another $750.

In most cases, the person who did the paper-screening is not an officer. However, if s/he is an officer, s. 87.4(1) does not apply and the file will have to be processed. The first step would be having the CAIPS notes showing that paper-screening occurred. If so, we will assert that the person doing so is an officer; CIC will have to prove that the person is not an officer. If they cannot, the Court should order CIC to process the file.

I do not want to proceed initially with cases filed in Delhi because the visa post has so much volume I would expect it to have a cadre of clerks doing the paper-screening. If we get too many rejections initially, the Court will not take the other cases seriously. Therefore, I want to begin with the smaller visa posts where (a) officers may do both tasks and (b) promotion is possible. In my mind, it would not matter if the person who did the paper-screening was a clerk when s/he did so if, by 29 June 2012, s/he was an officer.

I will also be arguing that, even if the paper-screener was not an officer, as s/he was performing an officer's task, CIC must accept responsibility for having assigned an officer's task. So, we will have two arguments.

I am not particular optimistic that this litigation will succeed. However, I have always believed that the more people who speak up, the more likely a political solution will ensue. Now that we have a new minister, one who has not invested himself in the process, we might find a less hostile reception. But, it is a "shot in the dark". If you are willing to invest your money into the project, I will do my best to make it work.

Because written arguments will have to be prepared, served and filed for each case, another lawyer must be paid and a new $50 filing fee will be due, I will not be reducing the fee. It's your call.

Regards,

Tim



My question is that should we participate in this case ans is there change to win the same?

Yes, if you want to contribute to Tim's retirement fund. Probably as successful as his previous Federal Court Cases on 87.4.

 

[BBOYZ1]

Hi room,
Is it worth applying in the first place as the CIC has stated that it will only consider 5000 applications and within that they will not consider more than 300 applications per trade for processing in this year. I guess all the applications have been received by them in the very first month itself (may 2013).
I haven’t even booked the IELTS exam yet, just confused if it is worth even to apply it this year ?

 

[lenininy2k]

Hi room,
Is it worth applying in the first place as the CIC has stated that it will only consider 5000 applications and within that they will not consider more than 300 applications per trade for processing in this year. I guess all the applications have been received by them in the very first month itself (may 2013).
I haven't even booked the IELTS exam yet, just confused if it is worth even to apply it this year ?

Not sure how CIC calculate CAP. As of today they received only 360+ applications.

 

[zardoz]

Not sure how CIC calculate CAP. As of today they received only 360+ applications.

As of today they only report having received 360+ applications. The actual number sitting in the queue waiting to be processed is probably MUCH higher.

 

[kchakus]

http://o.canada.com/2013/07/31/another-reason-why-its-a-bad-time-for-a-visa-officer-strike/

 

[Dr. Tarun]

Dear mates,
I received ppr yesterday. They asked me to send it to SGVO. They added another line-'Pls note that, DIPLOMATIC/OFFICIAL passports are NOT accepted.' But I am holding official passport. Now what to do? Pls share me my friends.
Tarun

 

[zardoz]

You need to apply for a "personal" or "ordinary" passport.

 

[bangladesh-canada2012]

LATEST MAIL FROM TIM

Dear Litigant,

One of you has asked me if I am willing to commence litigation along the lines that I mentioned before; viz., for those who have been paper-screened. I asked another lawyer if she would work with me in doing so because I do not want to file the cases under my name in order to avoid Justice Barnes halting the new litigation, too. I will, however, prepare the written submissions. Each case will have to proceed independently because the ruling will depend on who did the paper-screening. The fee would be $750 USD initially and, if successful, another $750.

In most cases, the person who did the paper-screening is not an officer. However, if s/he is an officer, s. 87.4(1) does not apply and the file will have to be processed. The first step would be having the CAIPS notes showing that paper-screening occurred. If so, we will assert that the person doing so is an officer; CIC will have to prove that the person is not an officer. If they cannot, the Court should order CIC to process the file.

I do not want to proceed initially with cases filed in Delhi because the visa post has so much volume I would expect it to have a cadre of clerks doing the paper-screening. If we get too many rejections initially, the Court will not take the other cases seriously. Therefore, I want to begin with the smaller visa posts where (a) officers may do both tasks and (b) promotion is possible. In my mind, it would not matter if the person who did the paper-screening was a clerk when s/he did so if, by 29 June 2012, s/he was an officer.

I will also be arguing that, even if the paper-screener was not an officer, as s/he was performing an officer's task, CIC must accept responsibility for having assigned an officer's task. So, we will have two arguments.

I am not particular optimistic that this litigation will succeed. However, I have always believed that the more people who speak up, the more likely a political solution will ensue. Now that we have a new minister, one who has not invested himself in the process, we might find a less hostile reception. But, it is a "shot in the dark". If you are willing to invest your money into the project, I will do my best to make it work.

Because written arguments will have to be prepared, served and filed for each case, another lawyer must be paid and a new $50 filing fee will be due, I will not be reducing the fee. It's your call.

Regards,

Tim



My question is that should we participate in this case ans is there change to win the same?

Dear Jewel 1020 bhai,

Is it really impossible to united all & try attract the media & International Human right association's
attention, I got this Idea from Indian ( Punjabi People in face book), But I am wondering why they don't try to attract the Indian media.

So, I think If we Bangladeshi applicant start this process other country people also would
inspired from it & If they also would start together it would attract the media very shortly,
I believe it would must bring some thing positive or at least we can claim compensation.

Pls. do some thing.


regards

 

[zardoz]

There is a saying, "tilting at windmills", that seems very appropriate here.