INLAND APPLICATIONS 2014

[lellen]

okay so something interesting. we have submitted application for my wife on march 12 along with medical. nothing from CIC yet (obviously).

today the doctor's office called my wife and informed her that immigration has asked for additional tests like kidney function test and creatinine test. is that normal? i mean are these tests new additions or the doctor forgot to do them the first time?

The good news is that now we know for sure that they're looking at the applications, even without AOR...

 

[randhawa_a]

okay so something interesting. we have submitted application for my wife on march 12 along with medical. nothing from CIC yet (obviously).

today the doctor's office called my wife and informed her that immigration has asked for additional tests like kidney function test and creatinine test. is that normal? i mean are these tests new additions or the doctor forgot to do them the first time?

that mean they r processing applications without giving aor?

 

[sophieee]

The good news is that now we know for sure that they're looking at the applications, even without AOR...

I'm not so optimistic about this, maybe they have a code for a standard procedure, if someone's results shows this, they need to do that... Maybe they said that CIC asking for it, because this is written by CIC, and not because an agent contacted them.

 

[Happywife08]

Hello Everyone!!

I wanted to post my timeline here because when I was in the process I know I wanted to see how others were doing.

Thankfully I am done with this process, I hope it helps

A bit about my case: I'm from Costa Rica my hubby is Canadian, We have a 28 year difference, no children. We have been together for 5 and half years. I did send in a complete package, everything they required I sent it at once. Total fees, police backgrounds, medicals and tons of pictures. I also made sure it was very organized with indexes and everything.

Inland
Visa Office......: Vegreville
App. Filed.......: March 01 2013
AOR Received.: March 15 2013
Med's Done....: Feb 28 2013
AIP & DM: January 9th 2014 (both at the same time)
LANDING Interview: Feb 12th 2014 Etobicoke
PR Card Arrived April 11th 2014 (58 days after landing)

P.S: Age difference is not a red Flag if you can prove your genuine relationship..

GOOD LUCK TO EVERYONE..

 

[screech339]

ha

Hello Everyone!!

P.S: Age difference is not a red Flag if you can prove your genuine relationship..

GOOD LUCK TO EVERYONE..

I am glad that your age different didn't cause any issues with your case. But no offense, CIC is going to consider age difference a red flag regardless of how you think that it is not a red flag. As long as you provide as much proof of genuine relationship, so much the better. In your case, you have been married 5.5 years. That was the tipping part that acted in your favour of a good sign of showing your relationship as genuine.

CIC can't turn a blind eye to those that have a huge age difference just because you had no issues with yours. If your marriage had been less than 2 years, CIC would have had a closer look at your file and may ask for an interview to verify your relationship.

Count your lucky stars that CIC didn't call for an interview to verify your marriage, despite you provided as much proof of relationship as possible.

No matter how you feel that age difference is not a red flag, other applicants in similar situation have to be prepared to be called for interview. They can't let down their guard and not expect a call for interview. Those that don't, congrats to them. Those unfortunate cannot claim to say that CIC is being unfair to them. If they want to blame anyone, they can blame those that actually got caught for marriage fraud for immigration purposes due to age differences as one of the signs.

Screech339

 

[chakrab]

Great advice from Carlaganda23, but even if your wife has a kidney disorder, which we all pray that she does not, that should have no impact on her PR approval. Spouses and partners of sponsors are not denied due to excess demand, but something like active TB (which could be a danger to the public) would be a problem.

Good luck...and tell your wife to enjoy all of her coconut H2O! LOL!

Thanks a lot Ponga and Carlaganda23. I have bought her a case of coconut water, which she seems to enjoy quite a bit. We are going to go back to the doctor this week and do the additional tests

Regarding the fact if this means that they are processing cases, well I had the same thought in mind. Without being overly excited, I also thought the medical department is different from the main application department. Similar to fingerprinting and finance, they probably check the status of their own submissions, verify results and put it on the system for the main application officer to view.

All the best to everyone as usual. Hope we hear something positive soon.

 

[Carlaganda23]

Thanks a lot Ponga and Carlaganda23. I have bought her a case of coconut water, which she seems to enjoy quite a bit. We are going to go back to the doctor this week and do the additional tests

Regarding the fact if this means that they are processing cases, well I had the same thought in mind. Without being overly excited, I also thought the medical department is different from the main application department. Similar to fingerprinting and finance, they probably check the status of their own submissions, verify results and put it on the system for the main application officer to view.

All the best to everyone as usual. Hope we hear something positive soon.

You're Welcome Chakrab,

I'm glad to help! I hope you will get it sorted soon, keep us posted I'm hoping we will hear from our application soon.

 

[alicia13]

I'm not so optimistic about this, maybe they have a code for a standard procedure, if someone's results shows this, they need to do that... Maybe they said that CIC asking for it, because this is written by CIC, and not because an agent contacted them.

I agree, I strongly doubt that CIC has actually gotten to this freshly performed medical already, it's probably standard protocol for a slight abnormality.

 

[civic]

Have you guys heard of CBSA home visits to determine if spouses/common-law are actually cohabiting?

I found this records...


On August 9, 2011 (a Tuesday) the CBSA officers drove past both houses, there were no cars in either driveway and the Applicant's car was in a one-car garage at the Markham house.
The CBSA officers visited the Markham house and the Applicant let them in. They then questioned the Applicant about her husband's clothes and personal hygiene/grooming supplies. Concluding that the answers were unsatisfactory and that she might be a flight risk, the Applicant was arrested and held in detention for 11 days.

[8] The CBSA officers noted the following salient facts in relation to the home visit:
• The Applicant provided an address in Stouffville to the Ministry of Transportation and her Sponsor provided an address in Markham;
• Neither the Applicant nor the Sponsor's cars were present at either address around 05:00 hrs on August 9, 2011;
• At 10:43 hrs no one answered the door at the Stouffville address, but a dog was present;
• At 11:10 hrs the Applicant answered the door at the Markham address, but the Sponsor was not present;
• When asked to show the CBSA some of the Sponsor's clothing, the Applicant showed a men's coat, one shirt and one pair of pants, in a closet full of women's clothing;
• The ensuite bathroom's shower was recently used and there was a wet toothbrush; the Applicant's hair was still wet and she said the toothbrush was the Sponsor's;
• When asked to show the CBSA her own toothbrush, the Applicant could not find it, then said she shared a toothbrush with the Sponsor;
• When asked to show the Officer some of the Sponsor's socks and underwear, the Applicant had difficulty finding any of his clothing but eventually found a pair of socks from a storage bin she claimed was his; and
• The Applicant had two Ontario driver's licences with two addresses and could not explain why.


[9] The Applicant was later interviewed by a different CBSA officer following her arrest, this time with the assistance of a translator. The salient features of that interview were:
• The Applicant told the CBSA that the Sponsor left at 07:00 hrs but then stated he spent the night at his daughter's home, but stated she did not know where the daughter lived or what the daughter's name or phone number was;
• When asked how long her Sponsor had been living with the daughter, the Applicant stated it may have been a few nights a month but then changed her answer and said that the Sponsor would sometimes spend a few nights a week with his daughter;
• One of the CBSA officers phoned the Sponsor who alleged he left the house at 07:00 hrs that morning and spent the whole night before at home with the Applicant;
• When asked about his toiletries, the Sponsor claimed he kept them all with him in his car;
• When asked about his clothing, the Sponsor claimed they were kept in a different room in the house; and
• When the CBSA advised the Sponsor that they could not find any of his clothing at the house, the Sponsor changed his answer and told the CBSA that most of his clothing was at his daughter's house.

 

[chakrab]

i find this utterly fake. CBSA will never make house calls, that's not their job. on top of that the story sounds like someone's bad fantasy.

 

[Ponga]

Not surprising at all. There's a reason why a conditional PR (condition 51) requires the couple to continue to live together, under the same roof. This is likely the best way for CBSA to verify that they are in fact conforming to the rules!

 

[Ponga]

i find this utterly fake. CBSA will never make house calls, that's not their job. on top of that the story sounds like someone's bad fantasy.

CBSA does in fact make house calls. There have been a handful of members here that have had such visits!

 

[chakrab]

CBSA does in fact make house calls. There have been a handful of members here that have had such visits!

shouldn't it be from the RCMP or CIC? it's not CBSA's jurisdiction though. Also why would they make house call at 5 AM?

edit - i did some searching and found couple of cases where the CBSA visit home of refugee claimants who have filed for PRRA, if they are considered flight risk. not any other other.

 

[screech339]

shouldn't it be from the RCMP or CIC? it's not CBSA's jurisdiction though. Also why would they make house call at 5 AM?

edit - i did some searching and found couple of cases where the CBSA visit home of refugee claimants who have filed for PRRA, if they are considered flight risk. not any other other.

If they made their rounds at 8am, the applicant can claim the sponsor is at work. By going around at 5am, it increase the likelihood that both sponsor and applicant are in the house living together if one car is found at the house at 5am.

But they basically got caught when 2 different addresses was submitted to government officials of their residences and that tipped them off.

Screech339

 

[Ponga]

shouldn't it be from the RCMP or CIC? it's not CBSA's jurisdiction though. Also why would they make house call at 5 AM?

edit - i did some searching and found couple of cases where the CBSA visit home of refugee claimants who have filed for PRRA, if they are considered flight risk. not any other other.

I guess it wouldn't matter much to the startled resident, what badge the officer would be wearing.

The bottom line is that they [CBSA, CIC, RCMP, et al] may be working together, but one (or more) of these agencies is very likely following up on at least some of those with a condition 51 on their PR. I doubt very much that CIC would just take their word that they will live together for 2 years, if it's a requirement of the applicant's PR.