IEC Visa to OWP Implied Status (PR Application) Help!

[SchnookoLoly]

Screech asked if you submitted an application for restoration of status.

You replied, "Nope".

I proved you were lying.

It's not bullying, it's calling you out.

Doesn't change the fact that you don't have legal status and should not be working.

 

[Jamesdavid3]

Screech asked if you submitted an application for restoration of status.

You replied, "Nope".

I proved you were lying.

It's not bullying, it's calling you out.

Doesn't change the fact that you don't have legal status and should not be working.

I am working under Implied Status, end of

 

[screech339]

I am working under Implied Status, end of

May I remind you this: just in case you skipped over this bit of information I posted earlier.

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/tools/temp/visa/validity/restoration.asp

Continue to work or study

Contrary to applicants to whom we recognize an implied status, persons awaiting restoration have lost their status and may not continue to work or attend school.

Even CIC admits that CONTRARY to those who BELIEVED they are on IMPLIED STATUS, when they are, in fact, not on implied status and cannot work while waiting for restoration.

 

[SchnookoLoly]

I am working under Implied Status, end of

Except you don't have implied status, because IEC permit holders do not benefit from implied status.

But let's say we are all wrong, that you do have implied status. As Screech pointed out, because you had to apply for restoration of status, you CANNOT continue working while you are waiting for a response. You DO NOT have implied status while you wait for restoration.

But you refuse to believe that, so there's no point arguing further.

 

[screech339]

JamesDavid,

Why don't you ask all your "expert" friends on IEC that you keep referring to, whether you can work while waiting for status of restoration. I bet they will tell you different. They only know about working under IEC but not under "status of restoration". They probably don't have an answer on that as they probably never had to deal with that.

 

[little_apple]

This guy is giving wrong advice all over the forum. If he will be invited to a landing interview and he will be asked the same questions I had to answer during my landing they will refuse his PR for sure.

I was questioned pretty badly. The officer asked me if I stopped working after my IEC expired. I did and I had to prove it (record of employment etc.). Ok, I applied outland and stayed in Canada as a visitor for 6 weeks between my expired IEC and my approved PR. But still... the officer took the possible "working illegally" part pretty seriously

 

[screech339]

This guy is giving wrong advice all over the forum. If he will be invited to a landing interview and he will be asked the same questions I had to answer during my landing they will refuse his PR for sure.

I was questioned pretty badly. The officer asked me if I stopped working after my IEC expired. I did and I had to prove it (record of employment etc.). Ok, I applied outland and stayed in Canada as a visitor for 6 weeks between my expired IEC and my approved PR. But still... the officer took the possible "working illegally" part pretty seriously

That is very interesting. I wonder if Jamesdavid will lie to the officer at his landing or tell him/her that he was working on "implied status" under IEC.

If he lie to the officer it means we were right all along and he was wrong. If he tells the truth that he has been working pass IEC date under "implied status" he will likely get canned and not granted PR status.

Screech339

 

[Ponga]

But aren't most inland landing interviews pretty basic...with only a few general questions?

 

[Alurra71]

But aren't most inland landing interviews pretty basic...with only a few general questions?

Correct, they are basic. They do however ask you if you have been working and ask you to bring a letter of employment signed by your boss and such. It was included in the 'landing' letter received. I suppose if James gets the same letter he'll find out one way or another if he has be working 'legally' this entire time.

It's easy to stick your head in the sand and play ostrich when the truth is not what you really want or need to hear ...

 

[screech339]

Correct, they are basic. They do however ask you if you have been working and ask you to bring a letter of employment signed by your boss and such. It was included in the 'landing' letter received. I suppose if James gets the same letter he'll find out one way or another if he has be working 'legally' this entire time.

It's easy to stick your head in the sand and play ostrich when the truth is not what you really want or need to hear ...

I wonder if Jamesdavid will ask his boss not to mention the time he was working past his expire date in the letter, if he is required to provide employment letter.

 

[brucem]

I just spent my whole lunch hour reading this thread....fascinating stuff. I note JD has -173 votes....ouch!

 

[Jamesdavid3]

There is just not enough proof or evidence to back any of this up, yes there has been 2 cases maybe of people getting caught but still to this day there is not a real solid story of what happened and because of those 2 cases everyone is judging it from that.

There are thousands of applications processed each year and if only 2 of them were bad like that well I would say I have good odds of being right about the IEC and continuing to work on Implied Status.

I am just continuing to do what many others have done thats all.

 

[Jamesdavid3]

I wonder if Jamesdavid will ask his boss not to mention the time he was working past his expire date in the letter, if he is required to provide employment letter.

The company I work for know that my Work Permit and Sin Expired back in January, there was never any issues getting an employment letter

 

[screech339]

The company I work for know that my Work Permit and Sin Expired back in January, there was never any issues getting an employment letter

The question is this. Will the employment letter states you have been working up to the present? If it does, will that jeopardize your ability to get PR status since it proven that you have been working past your IEC expire date. Are you willing to show this letter to CIC agent? Are you that confidence that you won't be denied PR status at landing, the most important last step of getting PR status of your life?

 

[brucem]

I think you're blinding yourself from the point James. Your original argument is gone as you lost your 'implied status' (if you had any) when your application was returned and you had to submit it again with restoration of status. Its nothing to do with whether you had implied status on IEC anymore...that ball is long gone out the park! I don't think you can really argue that 'continuing to do as others have done' is really an argument. Irrespective of the argument you are putting your PR status in jeopardy - you may or may not get away with it - is it worth it?. I realise now that you were complaining about the wait times on the inland thread...why are you worried if you're continuing to work?!

Back in 2006 I was on the same visa, I knowingly applied for an extension becuase I had been advised that it buys you a couple of months under implied status while they process the request (got this from friends doing the same thing) but you will ultimately be refused as you cannot extend this visa. I worked for a large worldwide corporation and when they got wind of what I was doing I was dragged into the managers office (they had done some digging with legal and CIC) and I was told in no uncertain terms that I would be stopping work right there and then as I did not have implied status.