Attention, immigration officer would have all right to reassess his CRS score. Here is where it comes from:DelPiero07 said:
1. Who is a family member:
3) For the purposes of the Act, other than section 12 and paragraph 38(2)(d), and for the purposes of these Regulations, other than paragraph 7.1(3)(a) and sections 159.1 and 159.5, family member in respect of a person means
(a) the spouse or common-law partner of the person;
(b) a dependent child of the person or of the person’s spouse or common-law partner; and
(c) a dependent child of a dependent child referred to in paragraph (b).
(b) the non-accompanying family member is
(i) the spouse of the foreign national, except where the relationship between the spouse and foreign national has broken down in law or in fact,
With this definition, his non accompanying spouse is still a family member.
2. Changes to family composition.
Section A11.2 does not apply when an applicant adds a family member to their application after the e-APR; however, the family member will have to be assessed, and the principal applicant must provide IRCC with the Additional Family Information form [IMM 5406 (PDF, 570.00 KB)] and pay the applicable fees online.
This is the reason why there is no new recalculation for new family member (marrying after AOR). But that is not his case. He would not be adding a new family member, he would be changing status of his current family member. So the Section A11.2 can be applied.
3. Change of circumstance after AOR
To assess an application under section A11.2, a processing office must consider the information in an applicant’s profile at the time of the round of invitations and the information provided when the applicant submits their e-APR. After an e-APR is submitted, an application cannot be refused due to a change in circumstance unless
•the officer determines that the change occurred before the applicant submitted their e-APR and that the change would have caused the applicant to be refused under section A11.2: therefore, the application should be refused under section A11.2; or
•the change in circumstance means the applicant no longer meets the minimum requirements of the program to which they are applying; therefore, the application may still meet the requirements of section A11.2 but can be refused for failing to meet program requirements.
For example, if an applicant marries before they submit their e-APR but informs CIC of the marriage only after they submit their e-APR, the marriage can be taken into account as part of the section A11.2 assessment.
If, however, an applicant marries after they submit their e-APR, then informs CIC of the marriage, the marriage cannot be taken into account as part of the section A11.2 assessment. However, the change in circumstance may affect whether the applicant still meets the program requirements. See below for details.
He might oppose, that he did inform about everything.
What I was talking about, that with all the evidence he put, an immigration officer has every right to doubt the genuine intentions of his spouse to be non accompanying at the moment of ITA and AOR and changing her mind after AOR.
Nothing is blocking an officer to do the further investigation (which can include deeper recheck of history of whole case and history of his spouse) and finally identifying former intentions as not genuine. As a result same logic can be used as in the example stated above (where an applicant fail to inform about his marriage, that happened before AOR).
Again in this particular case, no regulation would protect him against such assessment. So putting down his application under current circumstances is a risk of later rejection.
Now we have situation where amount of monthly ITA, doest exceed the immigration plan 2017 for economic immigrants. All that gives impression, like if 30-40% of all ITA is counted to end in failure. That gives hint, that willingness to recheck and reject doubfull applications can be much higher.
