|
|
| Subject: Roy anyone please help case H&C grounds |
|
|
|
Hello
I was researching into some case on H&C issues and I realize ur epertise in this area. Here is my case.
My dad applied for PR visa back in 1992, he landed in canada in 1993, at which time he had a baby which he fail to declare.
He would like to sponser that child but was turned down for that son is not a member of family class.
We were going to appeal there decision but a lawyer say we shoudl cancel the appeal as we cant win. and we should appy under Humanitarian and compassionate grounds.
My questions are:
How is appeal granted under H&C consideration do I send in teh doc for appeal and they figure that enough eveidence are there for H&C and consider it. Lawyer said no we have to appy under H&C as the appeal board is a dif area all together.
2) do I stand a chance applying on H&C from my son if I provide DOCs that all of my other children are here.
A)other is being sponsered by another one of my children and he does not have enough income to have mother bring child on as an accompanying dep
B) No one will be there to take care of the child.
c) In june 03 another one of my child ( grouwn adult 45, pre relationship) gunned down an murdured and am terrified of leaving anymore of my children there
D) at 15 my son a dependant in High school, no one guardian will be there to take care of him.
e)Mother as given me the OK to take the children hence have gone ahead and taken 3 of them all ready.
and a tone of other evidence to back my case, do I stand a chance.
[30-04-2008,13:25]
[***.186.167.6]
pearline |
|
(in reply to: Roy anyone please help case H&C grounds)
Since there is no argument that the child is caught by section 117(9)(d) of the regulations and his exclusion was correct in law and in fact,H&C application is your only hope.But the approach in presenting the H & C case has to be to treat the child as a relative who is not a member of the family class and built the case around it.H & C circumstances which arise due to exclusion under R117(9)(d) are unlikely to lead to a positive decision.CIC will not render a positive H & C decision that will undermine case law supporting exclusion and refusals under 117(9)(d).In other words,you cannot simply ask CIC in the H & C application to overrule its own exclusion decision because that decision gave rise to a complicated family situation.That will not cut it.Rulings of the federal court showed little sympathy to appellants who made misinformed but deliberate decisions to exclude family members from their PR applications.The immigration and Refugee board has no jurisdiction in this case since the child was determined by CIC not to be a family member.You are completely in the hands of the immigration officer and I wouldn´t say you have a terrific chance,but if the application is prepared professionally you might get a positive decision.
[30-04-2008,16:36]
[**.225.76.57]
Amir |
(in reply to: Roy anyone please help case H&C grounds)
First, your thread does not make any sense.
in your first 2 sentences you say your father applied in 1992 with an undeclared child.
by the time you get to #2 it is YOUR son that was undeclared.
then you talk about ´A´ who is sponsoring who here?
I have seen your posts on another forum and things really smell strange.
[30-04-2008,18:09]
[***.20.92.250]
Sharon |
H&C (in reply to: Roy anyone please help case H&C grounds)
my heart leaps at the thought of what you just wrote. Taking into consideration the best interest of the child. I do understand that they might not want to consider the H&C area for this dependant.
But how else is he suppose to sponser this child, he did not deliberatly left him from his application.
This law seriously need to be looked into, no law shoudl eliminate a person from the family when that person is ur own flesh an blood.
We spoke with a lawyer and he said the best bet is to apply under H&C just that we need to provide a lot of prove. Bottom line is if he cant come to live with us in Canada then one of us canadian citizen has to move back home to live with him.
Am so confused and stressed
[30-04-2008,18:11]
[***.186.167.6]
pearline |
H&C (in reply to: Roy anyone please help case H&C grounds)
ok let me break this down.
My dad applied for is PR in 1992 travelled and landed in april 1993, at which time he had a son born in feb of that same year 1993. Thats the son in question.
We wanted to appeal there decision but was told by a lwyer that we shoudl cancel and apply under H&C as this is the only way he possible could come.
Sorry I did not make this clearer, and more understanding. The case does not smell strange its fact.
[30-04-2008,18:18]
[***.186.167.6]
pearline |
H&C (in reply to: Roy anyone please help case H&C grounds)
Sharon
dad is the one sponsering the child, its is son 15 year old. I agree he is a nut to not have listed his child on the forms, how dumb is that.I wont dwell on that as the deed is already done. The thing in question now is how do we get the child here.
mom is being sponsered, we dont have enough income to bring his as an accompanying dependant, she could come then sponser him later, but who will take care of him while she is here. Gosh this is complicated am confused myself
[30-04-2008,18:23]
[***.186.167.6]
pearline |
(in reply to: Roy anyone please help case H&C grounds)
mom an dad are not together, so he cant bring her as a spouse or common law hence that would be the best and quickest way to get them here.
[30-04-2008,18:25]
[***.186.167.6]
pearline |
(in reply to: Roy anyone please help case H&C grounds)
pearline,
117(9)(d) is very controversial and there were calls to delete it.I do not think it needs to be deleted because it does address situations of deliberate exclusion of family members in order to avoid refusal of the PR application, by shutting the door to any subsequent sponsorship,but the system should use it more judiciously.It is ridiculous that an honest error would be lumped with attempts to circumvent the system and CIC will not properly investigate it.the system is being lazy here.
[30-04-2008,19:58]
[**.225.76.57]
Amir |
(in reply to: Roy anyone please help case H&C grounds)
I smell entrapment!!!!!!
Sharon has a point here.
No, No, No, NOT even though my name appears in this thread since I have been getting some really unusual phone calls lately I will not enter into this discussion.
Poor try!
Wait for the Federal court to overturn 117 (9) (d)
Roy
www.cvimmigration.com
[30-04-2008,20:55]
[**.52.217.159]
Roy |
Sharon has no point (in reply to: Roy anyone please help case H&C grounds)
I have no idea what ur talking about, entrapment and all, I was just asking a question I saw ur imput on a few other H&C cases and realize ur knowledgable in this area.
I did not ask Sharon as I have seen some other posting of which she replied to and she was quiet rude sometimes. Sharon take a lesson its not what you say, but how you say things
so I addressed my question to one main person. I did ask a bunch of other questions as my dad is sponsering two children, one papers are fine so some questions are relating to him.
Roy I did not call ur office so I dont know what ur talking about.
Thanks amir for answering my question your the only one who tried to help thanks again
[30-04-2008,21:29]
[**.227.210.124]
pearline |
(in reply to: Roy anyone please help case H&C grounds)
check your original post.
your opening remarks are about your dad, then your subsequent questions are in the first person as if the son is yours.
I am not giving you a bad time, just trying to make sure we understand the facts here.
You have a very difficult situation that needs legal assistance. Relying on answers from an immigration forum in this matter is a guaranteed disaster.
[30-04-2008,23:48]
[**.155.160.37]
Sharon |
