christmasoompa

Lovely part of the UK to live and work, and the flight makes sense now! Good luck with it all, I hope they give you your money back.

daisychain

Do Global Visas have qualified csic consultants then? Thought they were just advisors.

johncraw

they must do,either that or they are just saying so,still dont think they have the power to do anything,thinj ill just have to wait it out!

mojovibe

All these so called immigration specialists are only clerks that write out forms and find information, the same things that you could do for yourself.Some of them have experience in knowing exactly where and who to ask for this information but the majority of them don't, They are all self proffessed lawyers in immigration, but as far as I'm aware I don't think there's an NVQ at any level for their proffesion. There just the same as estate agents, a set of chancers.

Your application isn't favoured just because you have used them, anymore than it would if you had written out the forms your self. Much of the information that you need can be found on sites like these. With only the charge of an internet connection. Not the thousands that they charge, and you will probably get many more replies quicker than you would from the consultants, that you can accept or read between the lines.

Further good luck with your application and information for rehabillitation.

christmasoompa

Sorry, but on behalf of CSIC immigration consultants, I have to point out that they do have to study immigration law extensively (would *you* know which subsection of which law relates to each bit of immigration?), have to sit exams to qualify and don't just fill in forms for their clients.

Admittedly, for a straight forward case from the UK, there is not really any need for them if you have common sense, but you need to remember that many of their clients will be those claiming asylum, or appealing an immigration decision in court, or from rather more complicated circumstances - so they are hardly 'only clerks'!

mojovibe

Before this is misconstrued as being offensive please note that I mean no malice to the thread, post, or forum members in general with my following post.

No "I" wouldn't know which subsection of which law relates to each bit of immmigration. But if I asked on here and no one knew the answer, I would dig deeper elsewhereand eventually find the answer that I'm looking for. I commented on the skill level of these so called lawyers in general regarding
all the horror stories that I have heard. And the amount of rip offs that have occurred. And the way that they are coy with you when you speak to them on the phone. One firm based in Manchester was tying to tell me a few years ago that I would need their services to apply as a skiled immigrant, because I didn't have a job lined up. And they said if I applied on my own, it could take at least two years. When I asked them how much they would charge me for my application they said it would depend on my case. When I refered back to what they'd said about elligibillity because of my background, they said all cases whether elligible or not have a different time and cost to them, as every case is individual.

I filled in a form that they emailed and emailed it back to them, and they told me that I would be elligible to apply as a skilled worker. And that if I went through them it would only take about 6 months and they would line me up with a job aswell. (maybe they've got a magic wand) I told them at that time I was interested in Toronto and they said there was quite a bit of work there. When I visited Toronto some months after no one was hiring for the type of work that I wanted to do, or was prepared to do, sites were preparing to shut down for the winter, and nothing whatsoever being advertised.

Sometime after I came back they contacted me again, and suggested that if I applied now (back then 2008) the reccession would be over by the time the application was approved. And if I didn't get a job I could reside in Canada and work back in the UK? I never even told them that there wasn't any work there, so I smelt a rat with the change in their approach. They also claimed to have offices in Toronto, but when I looked for the address, it seemed like one of those mailbox drop sites with a concierge service in there I didn't bother to go inside.

So the firm your refering to, I would have automatically thought they wouldn't
be any different from any of the others with all the stories that I've heard in general. But if their worht their salt, then good on them, they should advertise more and provide a link to this site for reccomendation from the people who have been successsful them. As for the ones that informed john craw that he would be ok to apply with a drink driving conviction on his licence less than ten years old, need I say anymore. They must not have got much work doing blame claim cases.

christmasoompa

Oh, I totally agree that there are some very dodgy consultants out there (one or two in particular that crop up regularly on this forum) but I was just pointing out that a decent one will do a lot more than just fill forms in, as you implied. If they are dealing with complicated cases such as asylum or refugee cases, then it's a lot more complex than you would know as a FSW applicant.

I always think that the really good ones tend not to advertise, as they don't need to. Just as the same consultants/companies get slated on here over and over again for bad advice and customer service, similarly the same consultants/companies get recommend on here regularly. Caveat emptor and all that!

Gremmie

You can kiss that money good bye...
Hope this thread goes to teach other would be hopefuls that
1) That 1 extra beer can & will come back to screw you in so many ways for years to come
2) Why pay some ill advised "Consultants" when you can do this alone or with the help of friends on here.

hutchy100

Is a caution classed as a conviction? i just fill out my forms though sponsership and i put i did'nt get a convection (which i don't know if it's right or not) i had the police check done and it said i had no live trace

christmasoompa

'No live trace' means you do have a record but that its not recent , 'no trace' is what it would say if it was clear. So you'll need to provide an explanation to CIC.

HTH.

johncraw

it was more than 1 beer,it was a night out!not gonna screw me that bad know it all,ive got a pardon fron canadian embassy londonand can go to canada temp until i ge t my visa i wont be able to work but thats cool!!!!!!!!!!ye haaaa

Gremmie

Great Canada gets 1 more drunken lout You seem pretty proud of your nite out and getting caught for being drunk well this "know it al" got run over and has a mangled right arm from 1 such drunken idiot, he got 15 years for his troubles, hope they get you soon too

johncraw

you obviously live alone,ill leave you to it,15 years for a bruised arm?yawn,cheer up

Gremmie

no I'm married and heres the bruised arm, you ignorant A hole

mojovibe

That looks so sore mate, I hope its better or getting better now. And I hope this thread doesn't end up like the one I was posting on the other day. It must have a terrible ordeal going through a trauma like that. That driver must have known they were well over the limit to cause a "smash" and a "loss" like that. Or if they only had a pint and got involved in an "accident," they woud probably wish they hadn't have had that pint. But I doubt if it was an accident, they must have been well blathered to have caused that kind of harm to you and aso get 15 years for it. They will have plenty of time to think about their mistake, and hopefuy the harm they have caused you.

Digressing slightly

I was banned for 12 months quite sometime ago for being over the limit because I had 4 shandies, equivalent to 2 pints. I had done this for years thinking I wasn't doing anything wrong because I honestly thought you was alowed to drink and drive, as long as you wasn't drunk. But I would never drive if was going out "drinking" to get fresh or drunk, as I would call it back then. I don't even touch a drop now if I'm driving, or driving the next day. Infact I was only just marginally over the limit, but enough to be prosecuted. I would love to know if it was the first two shandies or the third or fourth that put me over? Anyway it doesn't matter now because it won't ever happen again.

Its about time they made it no alcohol whatsever if your driving, then there wouldn't be any doubt on how much that your allowed to drink, and then only the people who are "drunk" whilst they're driving would be prosecuted, and rightly so. Then the people who think its alright to have a pint on their way home, would know better not to bother and have a N.A. bevvy instead. There would be no mystery causing incriminations or potential unfairness like there is with the current ambigous law that's being enforced.

Or the current prescribed limit should bare a notice stating that it applies only to a trace found in your system resulting in the consumption of alcohol from the last twenty four hours. Instead of misleading people into thinking that they can drink and drive, but only if they take it steady and don't get blathered. And then suffering financially due to the myths of being allowed to drink and drive. The amount of people who still think its OK to drink and drive with a pint or two is quite staggering. But they won't listen to you when you tell them of your experience. They don't beleive that you can be over the limit if you just have a pint.