INLAND APPLICATIONS 2014

[chakrab]

has anyone who submitted their file directly to Mississauga had their file returned due to incomplete submission? just checking if CPC-M is at least opening the application, even if not issuing AOR.

 

[sophieee]

book mark the google spread sheet for time lines.

i think the last person to get an AIP was from Sept 2013. But that was a very simple case technically they are still working on applications from July 10th 2013.

In the 2013 thread someone posted July 15th.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArK2RVjQ5v59dFlqaGRPN3JxaGY4Nk9ucTZxV1Z0NEE&usp=sharing#gid=0
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AlF5vPwhP68bdENmTzlDSmpZTy1TRWdwamtLeURmZXc#gid=0
http://www.canadavisa.com/canada-immigration-discussion-board/inland-applications-2013-t129064.11625.html

The Sept 2013 applicant was outland. CPC-M average time for AIP right now is 316 days. (According to 4 cases, I don't count woodyc)

 

[sophieee]

has anyone who submitted their file directly to Mississauga had their file returned due to incomplete submission? just checking if CPC-M is at least opening the application, even if not issuing AOR.

At least 6 from the thread, who sent their app directly to Mississauga got AOR, so it's not completely true that they don't send AORs.

 

[chakrab]

At least 6 from the thread, who sent their app directly to Mississauga got AOR, so it's not completely true that they don't send AORs.

no no i meant for people who haven't got AOR but had their file returned within the 3 months period. just trying to figure out when the CPC sends out the AOR. used to be as soon as they open the file.

 

[sophieee]

no no i meant for people who haven't got AOR but had their file returned within the 3 months period. just trying to figure out when the CPC sends out the AOR. used to be as soon as they open the file.

Okay, I'm sorry, now I see what you meant. I'm just so fed up with what the call center are telling to others, that they don't send AOR anymore, and the reason for the long waiting for the AIP is because from now on they give AIP and DM together, etc... Everyone can see from the timelines, that that's just not true, it's like the agents made up things all the time.

 

[automaton82]

I haven't seen any cases whereby the applicant was able to get OHIP before AIP. We had a hard time getting OHIP with just the email AIP. Had to write to review board to qualify.

My spouse has OHIP right now (during application process), but she is here on a work permit with an LMO, so the card is set to expire when her permit does. Hopefully we have AIP by then.

There was no issue getting it, except we had to goto a "special" service ontario that was able to process this kind of OHIP application, and it required proof of residency.

 

[screech339]

My spouse has OHIP right now (during application process), but she is here on a work permit with an LMO, so the card is set to expire when her permit does. Hopefully we have AIP by then.

There was no issue getting it, except we had to goto a "special" service ontario that was able to process this kind of OHIP application, and it required proof of residency.

Since your spouse had a work permit, that would explain her ability to get on OHIP. I think in these cases does the person can continue the OHIP after work permit expires so long as residency is maintained. Plus I am assuming you applied for OWP with application. Doesn't this give your spouse "implied status" to keep working. I think it is under these circumstances that would allow your spouse to keep OHIP active since your spouse is on "implied status". Not sure how OHIP works for those under work "implied status".

 

[chakrab]

Since your spouse had a work permit, that would explain her ability to get on OHIP. I think in these cases does the person can continue the OHIP after work permit expires so long as residency is maintained. Plus I am assuming you applied for OWP with application. Doesn't this give your spouse "implied status" to keep working. I think it is under these circumstances that would allow your spouse to keep OHIP active since your spouse is on "implied status". Not sure how OHIP works for those under work "implied status".

they won't accept the card once it expires. one may have to appeal with all the receipts to OHIP.

 

[Tiffyali]

Hi everyone, just wondering if anyone can give me a help on this.

i got my visitor extension in earlier and CIC asked me to report the medical observation within 90days...the clinic i went is with eMedical file so I got a information sheet. Do i need to send CIC this information sheet as the report to this? Or they will automatically link to my file or anything like that?

again next month i need to apply for my visitor visa extension again, 2nd time so much spending!

 

[computergeek]

I applied for a visa extension for my wife, she is from a visa exempt country but her 6 months expired in December and here visa extension was expiring on June 30th. We applied for inland sponsorship in feb 2nd got AOR in May. I let them know in the visa extension application that she is being sponsored inland.
I received the visa extension in the mail yesterday and they only gave her until Augsut 29th 2014!!!!.then it says "Must leave Canada by 08-29-2014". Seriously, why do that? so that I have to pay again for another visa extension!! I really doubt she is going to get DM before August 29th at the pace they are going. I am so dissapointed.

At this point you have three options:

(1) Apply for a further extension before the expiration in August 2014.
(2) Submit the OWP application and ask that it be added to your pending PR file (make sure to reference the file number). Note on the application "do not process until AIP is granted". Now she has implied status.
(3) Ignore the issue. She doesn't need to be in status for an Inland application anyway. Unless there is some other reason for removal, CBSA will honour the public policy and won't remove for lack of status as long as the inland application is pending.

Indeed, one of the BIG advantages of Inland is that the applicant need not be in status. While not ideal, its not something to be overly concerned about.

 

[angelpot11]

Hi GUYS,

JUST WANT TO ASK WE ARE PLANNING TO SUBMIT MY HUSBAND APPLICATION I'M SPONSORING HIM HIS HOLDING A WORK PERMIT, IS IT POSSIBLE TO APPLY AN OPEN PERMIT APPICATION AT THE SAME TIME W/ HIS PR APPLICATION? IS THERE SOMEBODY W/ THE SAME EXPERIENCE PLS. SHARE ALL INPUTS WERE APPRECIATED.

THANK YOU SO MUCH SENIORS AND SIR LEON PLS. HELP. NEED YOUR INPUTS...

ANGELPOT

 

[computergeek]

Hi GUYS,

JUST WANT TO ASK WE ARE PLANNING TO SUBMIT MY HUSBAND APPLICATION I'M SPONSORING HIM HIS HOLDING A WORK PERMIT, IS IT POSSIBLE TO APPLY AN OPEN PERMIT APPICATION AT THE SAME TIME W/ HIS PR APPLICATION? IS THERE SOMEBODY W/ THE SAME EXPERIENCE PLS. SHARE ALL INPUTS WERE APPRECIATED.

THANK YOU SO MUCH SENIORS AND SIR LEON PLS. HELP. NEED YOUR INPUTS...

ANGELPOT

Yes. Further, if his work permit is not one of the non-extendable type (IEC, PGWP) then his OWP application would provide him with implied status and he may continue working (as far as CIC is concerned. Some employers are not comfortable with implied status).

 

[Ponga]

At this point you have three options:

(1) Apply for a further extension before the expiration in August 2014.
(2) Submit the OWP application and ask that it be added to your pending PR file (make sure to reference the file number). Note on the application "do not process until AIP is granted". Now she has implied status.
(3) Ignore the issue. She doesn't need to be in status for an Inland application anyway. Unless there is some other reason for removal, CBSA will honour the public policy and won't remove for lack of status as long as the inland application is pending.

Indeed, one of the BIG advantages of Inland is that the applicant need not be in status. While not ideal, its not something to be overly concerned about.

Since the CBSA Administrative Deferral of Removal policy ended in November 2011, do you know for certain that Inland applicants are in fact still allowed to remain, provided that they have no other inadmissibility issues?

There's also been discussion recently in a couple of threads about an out of status person submitting an Outland application from within Canada. The majority seem to think that it doesn't necessarily facilitate a removal by CBSA any differently than an Inland applicant.

Just curious if you have a comment or opinion.

 

[computergeek]

Since the CBSA Administrative Deferral of Removal policy ended in November 2011, do you know for certain that Inland applicants are in fact still allowed to remain, provided that they have no other inadmissibility issues?

There's also been discussion recently in a couple of threads about an out of status person submitting an Outland application from within Canada. The majority seem to think that it doesn't necessarily facilitate a removal by CBSA any differently than an Inland applicant.

Just curious if you have a comment or opinion.

The odd thing about policy end dates is that unless there's a new policy to replace it, the default is to continue following the old policy. Look at the policy about extending medicals - the OB is actually expired, yet CIC continues to follow it. In addition, I personally know of multiple cases in which someone is under a removal order and CBSA continues to treat Inland as an administrative deferral (including cases from 2014).

It is a statutory requirement that an Outland applicant be in status but with that said, CIC won't necessarily know that the applicant isn't in status and that's not something they tend to check. But the risk is that if the applicant is called for an interview and leaves Canada they won't be permitted to re-enter (which is logical - they aren't likely to leave at the end of their "visit" based upon prior behaviour).

So I wouldn't expect either Inland OR Outland applications to lead to removal (though failed Inland typically does lead to a departure order for the applicant) by itself. CBSA isn't so hungry for extra work to do that they're off looking for people to deport. The key is to avoid attracting their attention. Once you catch their attention though, it's difficult to stop the wheels of bureaucracy from grinding one down.

 

[Ponga]

It is a statutory requirement that an Outland applicant be in status but with that said, CIC won't necessarily know that the applicant isn't in status and that's not something they tend to check.

Some here apparently do not agree that there is such a statutory requirement at all. Plus CIC would know of the overstay, since the applicant would have to show where s/he had been living in the application. At the very least that could lead CIC to send the application to LA or NY (for an American) and they would not benefit from the faster processing time of CPC-O.