IRCC Announces Change - PCCs and Schedule A now must be submitted up front

[Knittingdemon]

What will this change mean for FBI reports from channelers ? With the electronic submission, we could upload a PDF, but with the return to paper, and the requirement for "original" documents, should we assume that reports from Fieldprint (and other channelers) are no longer acceptable ?

But even the FBI no longer provides "secure" originals with the new 48-hour 'edo' process, so what should we do ?

To top if off, it seems that all our local police departments refuse to do fingerprint cards, except for "criminal" matters, so I'm struggling to figure out how to obtain anything other than a PDF report.

Can anybody report that a self-printed PDF report from a channeler was accepted for a spousal sponsorship ?

I'm wondering about this too. The standard for my home country is to supply PDF-certificates only, but not sure if a colour-printout of this is acceptable under the new rules. Hm.

 

[Knittingdemon]

I'm also wondering if those of us who have spent time (over 6 months) in Canada previously now need to do an upfront RMCP certificate. Does anyone else interpret the new checklist in this way, or am I misunderstanding?

 

[may_dec]

I didn't see any changes on the IMM5406.

It seems that 5406 was eventually changed. It has been re-arranged significantly, and now requires email addresses for everybody on the form, instead of the select few on the old form. Birthplace has now been clarified as Country of Birth, and a pull-down now allows one to enter "married, physically present" which was previously impossible.

Also, I'm not sure when this happened, but the checklist, IMM5533e has undergone further changes since the Feb 14th announcement. (I captured both of the new forms on the evening of the 14th, and again on the 27th - and both had changed again.)

The version that I retrieved last night appears to be faulty. On page 4, question 3, there are stray check boxes labelled Yes and No with no corresponding question. Then, on page 5, question 4, the previous common-law question has no place to answer. Presumably the stray checkboxes on the previous page pertain to this.

Has anybody else noticed this ? I suppose it could be some obscure Adobe bug, but it seems more likely to be a broken form.