Immigration, why they won & you lost!
It does not matter which type of application you submitted it depends on how the questions in that application were answered. With IRCC telling more and more applicants they can DIY we are being asked to represent clients to overcome innocent mistakes while answering questions that could be deemed misrepresentation. Others not conducting their own due diligence are hiring foreign lawyers or consultants not authourized to charge a fee for Canadian Immigration advice.
Being penny wise and pound foolish by submitting your own application causes undue refusals. Taking the advice of a foreign lawyer who probably has never read the IRPA or IRPR is an accident waiting to happen.
Below are the two main sections that immigration officers must enforce when reviewing any applicants answers whether a visitor, study permit, work permit, permanent residency, spousal sponsorship or humanitarian and compassionate application.
IRPA A 16 (1) A person who makes an application must answer truthfully all questions put to them for the purpose of the examination and must produce a visa and all relevant evidence and documents that the officer reasonably requires.
40 (1) A permanent resident or a foreign national is inadmissible for misrepresentation
(a) for directly or indirectly misrepresenting or withholding material facts relating to a relevant matter that induces or could induce an error in the administration of this Act;
(b) for being or having been sponsored by a person who is determined to be inadmissible for misrepresentation;
Immigration Officers are to follow all the regulations and ensure that each and every application is complete. Officers will never get questioned for refusing too many immigration applications but approve too many and watch out!
EXAMPELS:
#1 Sponsored spouse from abroad.
Q. Have you and your sponsor had ever lived together. A. Yes!
Next question Q. list periods of cohabitation
Dates were prior to the sponsor ever becoming a permanent resident. That showed the Officer that her husband had not been medically examined or declared on her application for permanent residency. Applicant thought the question “COHABITATION” meant when did the two of you start seriously dating by committing to one another. I wrote the consulate informing them of what the applicant thought the question meant and that they should have looked at the addresses listed in their applications that clearly showed they resided in two different towns.
#2 Applicant for a TWP to join his wife who was studying in Canada hired a Lawyer in India to advise him on his application. Applicant had been deported from Australia for working without authorization and the foreign lawyer told him to not tell IRCC that information. Applicant was found inadmissible for five years. Wife has a choice if she wishes to apply for permanent residency in Canada after studying in Canada and gaining one year of employment in Canada. Divorce the husband to gain permanent residency or give up her dream.
#3 Sponsored spouse filled in her Schedule A accidentally said no to ever being refused a visitor or a temporary resident visa to another country when the questions should have been answered YES! I wrote the Embassy and informed them the reason for the innocent mistake pointing out their question is very misleading. I siad the question should read visitor visa or temporary resident visa!
