URGENT ADVICE NEEDED: FSW refused becos of no transcript

[Alfan]

Hello People,

I need urgent advice. I applied for FSW in November, and my application was received on Nov 29, 2011 and credit card charged after my application was checked for completeness. Sadly, I received an email from CPC/CIO refusing my application based on points. I noticed that full 25 points for education for my Masters degree and over 21 years full time study and wife's Bachelor degree and over 16 years full time study were not awarded because according to the VO, i did not include my transcripts.

Please i need advice on what to do because Form 5612 (Document Checklist) says Original Transcripts (if available). This if simply interpreted means original transcripts if they are available at the time of application.

More so, I know some few friends who applied without including their transcripts and they were assessed and given Positive Eligibility Review.

Anyone with a similar problem or had a similar but got it solved should advise please!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I am worried!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[mandiebraxton]

Sorry to be a bit harsh but not submitting transcript at all was a silly mistake on your part. How was CIO going to award you points for edu without any evidence? You could have asked someone if in doubt. You don't have to take any chances when it comes to these things, your friends may have gotten away with it cos they were just lucky. I will suggest you quickly contact CIO and explain to them and make available the transcripts as soon as possible. If you are lucky, they might reconsider (others have had decisions changed this way). If the cap allows it, you can put in a fresh application (your will get refund for the first app if u choose to reapply). You have no time to waste at all! All the best!
Mandie

 

[Alfan]

@ Mandiebraxton.... Thank you for your comments. Ur view is well taken, but if you go back to theDocument checklist, u will notice that Transcript was made optional by the inclusion of the word "if available". Also, reading the IRPA Regulations which is the operational guideline for FSW, no where was it stated that years of education can only be assessed by transcript.

Beside that, the VO recognized my Masters degree obtained in the UK even though I did not includethe transcript, I then wondered why recognise my degree gained in another country.

I have already appealed the decision, but did not include the copies of the transcript becos despite applying for them, the delay has been upto ten months. I quoted links for the VO to verify my story.

I know more than 5 persons who did not add transcript becos I asked before sending mine.

I need someone who knows any person with similar problem.

Meanwhile, thanks for ur advice despite ur harsh words,lol

 

[Alfan]

Meanwhile, though I dis not include transcript I included notarised copies of all my diploma, degree and professional certificates.

 

[mandiebraxton]

Your first post did not indicate that u sent other educational docs. You should have included transcript in the application, period. You can't always use others people's experiences as the rule. If I were you, I will put in a fresh application (if cap is open) and continue to persue the reconsideration cos this thing can drag without any result. We should never give CIO the least chance to refuse our applications. Good luck!
Mandie

 

[deepblues]

apply again with all documents asap if the cap is open..
thts the best thing to do.. there will b people who hve not submitted transcripts. but u pls apply again with all needed documents..
out files get returned due to inadequate documents not if there are more than required documents.

 

[ezinne]

Is it that you tried getting the transcript n couldn't. If that's d case give evidence why u can't produce the transcript like a witten note

Bt it is vital you include the transcript.

 

[Alfan]

Many thanks to Mandie, Ezinne and Deepblues for your efforts/suggestions.

In response to your views, I cannot apply again becos the Cap is filled (Social Work), and they did not refund my application fee despite being refused at the Eligibility stage. Frankly, I did not deliberately fail to include my transcript.... Indeed, I made several attempts to get the transcript from my schools in Nigeria....but you know how it is over there, things got entangled, and then the indefinite strike by ASUU in September spoiled everything.

It was my intention to add every document, but what really got me in this position is that, in the checklist (2011) unlike in the old one where you need to comply with both the CIO and Visa office checklist, under the provision for Transcript in the 2011 Document Checklist: it said Original transcripts of diplomas, degree, etc (If available). Under normal circumstances, such provision is extremely confusing because an ordinarly interpretation of it will imply that transcript is optional, and where you have it, you include but if not, proceed. I therefore, asked my friends who have passed theirs to be sure, and none include transcript.

This was the reason why I did not bother to explain the efforts made to get the transcript in my cover letter. It would not have cost me anything to photocopy my International Passport pages showing stamp of Entry into Nigeria and entry into UK when I travelled to Nigeria for the transcripts. I also have flight ticket confirmation of my trip and application letters I submitted for my transcripts before the strike.

However, I have done the best I could do now which is to contest the decision based on the ambigious nature of the provision for checklist which has the suffix (if available). What I also find annoying about the VO decision is that, he/she recognised my UK Masters degree and awarded points on that even when I did not include the transcripts, then why being selective. I have dissected their Immigration rules, and one of the cradinal principle of assessment of applications is consistency.


They have refused it already, but I will take it to any extent as I am very conversant with Canada immigration officer approach to things, and know they could be stupid and biased at times.

 

[mandiebraxton]

I am really sorry about your situation.. I am in the same NOC and same VO too. Like I said, dont leave any room for VO to refuse your application. I am surprised VO has not given you the chance to provide the transcript instead of refusing your file outright. You stated they awarded points for UK Masters, which to me should be tantamount for the full 25 points if u had 17 yrs full time education. A bit confused though. It is not too late to show all that evidence of trying to get transcript now to get the points u have been denied. You have a strong case against VO and I will urge you to contact Qorax, he can give you guidance. At least you don't pay for this consultation.
Mandie

 

[jadwig]

Can you be more specific on how your education points was awarded? Did the VO give you any points at all for education? You seem to imply so and then in the same breadth say it was selective/biased. Did the rejection letter include any clause like you've not been awarded full education points because you did not include the said transcript? I'm pointing this out so that you can be very specific and build a stronger case for reconsideration in your appeal process.

All the best.

 

[Alfan]

Mandie.....thanks once more. PLEASE WHO IS QORAX? HOW DO I CONTACT HIM/HER?; and to Jadwig....thanks for your question.

Now for better understanding, I have recapped below my educational qualification and what the VO said in awarding points. My educational qualification is thus:

Primary: 6yrs
Secondary: 6yrs
Diploma in Social Work: 2yrs
LLB Degree : 5yrs
Law School (professional): 1 yr
Compulsory NYSC training: 1 yr
Masters degree: 1yr

When my application was received at CIO, it was checked for completeness of all the supporting documents, and when it was found to have all documents, it was passed to a VO for assessment. The VO refused my application based on 55 points out of 100; he/she did not award points on my degrees and spouse's degree because no transcript was included.

He said and I quote:

''You have obtained insufficient points to qualify for immigration to Canada, the minimum requirement being 67 points.

You were assigned 12 points for your educational credential at the master’s degree level and at least 12 years of study. Education points are assigned based on the educational credential earned in combination with years of study to earn the credential. Transcripts are used in determining the years of study in earning the educational credential. As no transcripts were provided to determine the number of years of study to earn your educational credentials, points were assigned based on a master’s degree and at least 12 years of school study.

-...No adaptability points were assigned for your accompanying spouse’s education as no transcript was provided to determine the years of study to earn the educational credential. Points are assigned based on the educational credential earned in combination with years of study to earn the credential.

The VO assesment is confusing and at the same time inconsistent to me. In the first sentence, he/she said....you were assigned 12 points for your educational credential at the master's degree level and at least 12 years of study...., and the final sentence.... As no transcripts were provided to determine the number of years of study to earn your educational credentials, points were assigned based on a master's degree and at least 12 years of school study.

What does he/she mean? He/she is blowing hot and cold at the same time by saying on the one part that no transcript was included hence no educational credential points were awarded; BUT on the other part he/she is saying that points were awarded based on my master's degree and 12 years of study (which I presume to be basic education: primary and secondary school which does not need transcripts to be assessed).

By his words and conduct, he acknowledged my Masters degree and based on that recognition awarded the 12 points for masters degree and 12 years of study; Yet, I did not include the transcripts of this Masters just like I did not include the transcripts of my other certificates. For instance, under the FSW instruction guide and other immigration rules.... 12 points can only be awarded for '' ONE YEAR DIPLOMA, TRADE CERTIFICATE OR APPRENTICESHIP AND AT LEAST 12 YEARS OF FULL TIME STUDY, and never for A MASTERS DEGREE AND 12 YEARS OF FULL TIME STUDY. Rather, it is Masters degree and 17 years full time study of which you get 25points, and not otherwise. If the he/she did not accept the master's degree, the simplest message would have been......... ''points were only awarded for your 12 years of study as no points were awarded for your masters and other degrees becos you did not include the transcripts. There should have been no need to mention my masters becos by saying that 'points are awarded based on your masters and 12 years of study, he/she is automatically confirming that by virtue of my masters degree, I have 17 years and above full time study, hence does not need further proof of transcript.

I hope I have made my points clear. And like Mandie pointed out, why was he so callous not to give me benefit of explaining about the none inclusion of transcript which was an innocent omission despite efforts to get it which failed??

More so, What of the Immigration Officer who assessed my application for completeness of all required documents at the initial stage of its arrival at CIO? Does it mean he/she did not see that no transcript (an important document so to say) was not included, hence return it as incomplete as their guideline suggests? Even the VO, if he/she was not being wicked, callous and desperate to chop my application fee, he/she would have returned my application as incomplete as a fundamental document was omitted.

I hope I tried making the points clear? Hoping to hear from u guy's great views. Cheerio!!!

 

[PMM]

HI

Mandie.....thanks once more. PLEASE WHO IS QORAX? HOW DO I CONTACT HIM/HER?; and to Jadwig....thanks for your question.

Now for better understanding, I have recapped below my educational qualification and what the VO said in awarding points. My educational qualification is thus:

Primary: 6yrs
Secondary: 6yrs
Diploma in Social Work: 2yrs
LLB Degree : 5yrs
Law School (professional): 1 yr
Compulsory NYSC training: 1 yr
Masters degree: 1yr

When my application was received at CIO, it was checked for completeness of all the supporting documents, and when it was found to have all documents, it was passed to a VO for assessment. The VO refused my application based on 55 points out of 100; he/she did not award points on my degrees and spouse's degree because no transcript was included.

He said and I quote:

''You have obtained insufficient points to qualify for immigration to Canada, the minimum requirement being 67 points.

You were assigned 12 points for your educational credential at the master's degree level and at least 12 years of study. Education points are assigned based on the educational credential earned in combination with years of study to earn the credential. Transcripts are used in determining the years of study in earning the educational credential. As no transcripts were provided to determine the number of years of study to earn your educational credentials, points were assigned based on a master's degree and at least 12 years of school study.

-...No adaptability points were assigned for your accompanying spouse's education as no transcript was provided to determine the years of study to earn the educational credential. Points are assigned based on the educational credential earned in combination with years of study to earn the credential.

The VO assesment is confusing and at the same time inconsistent to me. In the first sentence, he/she said....you were assigned 12 points for your educational credential at the master's degree level and at least 12 years of study...., and the final sentence.... As no transcripts were provided to determine the number of years of study to earn your educational credentials, points were assigned based on a master's degree and at least 12 years of school study.

What does he/she mean? He/she is blowing hot and cold at the same time by saying on the one part that no transcript was included hence no educational credential points were awarded; BUT on the other part he/she is saying that points were awarded based on my master's degree and 12 years of study (which I presume to be basic education: primary and secondary school which does not need transcripts to be assessed).

By his words and conduct, he acknowledged my Masters degree and based on that recognition awarded the 12 points for masters degree and 12 years of study; Yet, I did not include the transcripts of this Masters just like I did not include the transcripts of my other certificates. For instance, under the FSW instruction guide and other immigration rules.... 12 points can only be awarded for '' ONE YEAR DIPLOMA, TRADE CERTIFICATE OR APPRENTICESHIP AND AT LEAST 12 YEARS OF FULL TIME STUDY, and never for A MASTERS DEGREE AND 12 YEARS OF FULL TIME STUDY. Rather, it is Masters degree and 17 years full time study of which you get 25points, and not otherwise. If the he/she did not accept the master's degree, the simplest message would have been......... ''points were only awarded for your 12 years of study as no points were awarded for your masters and other degrees becos you did not include the transcripts. There should have been no need to mention my masters becos by saying that 'points are awarded based on your masters and 12 years of study, he/she is automatically confirming that by virtue of my masters degree, I have 17 years and above full time study, hence does not need further proof of transcript.

I hope I have made my points clear. And like Mandie pointed out, why was he so callous not to give me benefit of explaining about the none inclusion of transcript which was an innocent omission despite efforts to get it which failed??

More so, What of the Immigration Officer who assessed my application for completeness of all required documents at the initial stage of its arrival at CIO? Does it mean he/she did not see that no transcript (an important document so to say) was not included, hence return it as incomplete as their guideline suggests? Even the VO, if he/she was not being wicked, callous and desperate to chop my application fee, he/she would have returned my application as incomplete as a fundamental document was omitted.

I hope I tried making the points clear? Hoping to hear from u guy's great views. Cheerio!!!

1. You really are beating a dead horse. #13 on the FSW state transcripts must be included if available They are available in your home country, you didn't include them, so the application was refused at the CIO level as incomplete. The CIO doesn't calculate your points, they check to see if the application is complete and the NOC is available. Your application wasn't complete.

 

[mandiebraxton]

This topic is really confusing! Was the app refused at CIO or VO stage? If CIO stage, like PMM said, forget it as it was YOUR duty to send all the relevant docs as per the checklist. And yeah, don't tow the 'if available' line. If it is VO stage, I am surprised Accra didnt request for an update of transcripts before making a decision on your file.
My dear friend, what you can do is to wait and apply in July (or whenever) where the new list comes out and pray we still have that on the list. Better still, get an offer and go through the FSW2 or WP route. You blew ur first chance cos u didn't seek proper counsel, I am sure if you had asked about the importance of transcripts in this forum, chances are 99.9% will tell you it is a MUST! Still try and seek reconsideration.
Mandie

 

[lukeke]

Hello Alfan,

In my opinion the 12 points awarded to you is not based on the masters but your primary and secondary education of 12 years. That's why the IO's letter says "at least 12 years of school study". As advised your best bet is to reapply when cap is opened/renewed sometime around July. Between NOW and THEN try to get the transcripts. If you live outside Nigeria don't just aply and relax....Handover the follow-up/processing over to someone living in the country and preferably working in the school(s). I am talking from my own experience...I live in Nigeria yet someone within the schools had to do the followup for me.

Best wishes!

 

[Alfan]

Hey People,

I thank everyone who made out time to read my post, and words cannot express my gratitude for your sound and intellectual reasoning.

I have noted your points, and will put them in good use when the need arises.

For now, I have already taken steps which is to appeal for a review.

I dont give up easily, neither do I think the VO reasoning cannot be faulted, 80% out of 1, they come out with stupid reasoning.

I will keep you all posted. Many thanks Mandrie, Lukeke and all who made contributions.

As it stands, I have before now recieved an update that the VO has 30 days to respond to my case, after which a higher authority looks into the matter.

It is a game, and I dont stand to loose anything. I have passed this bridge before, lets see how the voyage is

Cheers mate!!!