Andrew Miller

If consultant knew all facts then he shouldn't accept the case for PR (even through PNP), unless there was enough new supporting evidence (medical reports, cost impact analysis, etc.) in place that was giving a good chance for new, positive this time medical decision. A decision reached through standard process and not based on the Operational Bulletin 037 from September 2007 as it doesn't apply to Chapmans who are not federal business class applicants this time.

The question now is - did consultant know all the facts? If consultant knew about previous refusal then it was his obligation to analyze previous case, reasons for refusal and see if such reasons still exist, and if yes to determine if they can be positively dealt with now.

Maybe Chapmans didn't disclose all the facts (their current behavior may suggest it) to consultant or maybe there is enough strong evidence in place for consultant to believe that medical decision will be positive this time. We just don't know.

But regardless - consultant should have told Chapmans not to try to come to Canada prior to new positive medical decision as until such is rendered positively the previously determined inadmissibility is still in force.

Many consultants and lawyers will tell clients all they want to hear, just to get their money. On the other hand there are applicants who don't disclose all facts to their consultants and try to manipulate the process and consultants in various ways hoping that they can outsmart the system. Often they make decisions against the best advice given by consultant.

We just don't have enough info to know who the culprit is. If consultant knew all the facts and didn't properly advised Chapmans then he is to blame. Big time.

If consultant was kept in dark (even partially) and/or all decisions were made by Chapmans regardless different advice from consultant then they can blame only themselves.

nikki dreaming

It certainly will be interesting to keep an eye on this story.

Thanks for info Andrew

kiddy2ns

Looking at this from a different angle, this couple I believe were police officers. Hopefully they are not representative of the calibre of the Metropolitan police force? I am old enough to remember the serious crime unit/squad.(just can not remember their name)

dbd33

The Sweeney?

kiddy2ns

I like that, the Sweeny they acted like them but no seriously it cost the taxpayer an arm and a leg in compensation to all the wrongfully convicted. It got disbanded because they did not know what the truth was
I must add I do know not all coppers are the same before I get the hate mail.

Paul Wildy

I totally agree with the above. I personally find it unlikely that when discussing their case and background with their immigration consultant the Chapmans failed to mention they had been previously rejected. Certainly if they did mention it this should have been a red flag to Wills and Brazolot to examine the background thouroughly before proceeding. But as you say, there are unfortunately plenty of people who will tell clients what they want to hear in order to get their money.

Paul Wildy

But interestingly there have been other cases since in which the Federal Court has determined that visa officers should take into account the financial resources of applicants, even though the applicants were not in Business Class categories.

In the case of Airapetyan v. Canada (2007) the applicant was a Skilled Worker applicant and received a similar decision. So to did the applicant in the case Ching-Chu v. Canada (2007) where the applicant was a Provincial Nominee via PEI's PNP program.

So, as a point of academic interest, even though the operational bulletin only refers to Business Class applicants, I would be interested to know your thoughts on whether these principals would apply to all applicants and not just business class applicants?

Andrew Miller

Above case was dismissed, Judicial Review was not allowed.

This case was about refusal to grant the extension for providing response to the "fairness letter" - it was not about the medical inadmissibility decision itself.


I don't see CIC expanding Operational Bulletin 037 beyond Business class, regardless what court considered in both cases above. And remember that even in Business class CIC is not obligated to waive medical inadmissibility - CIC only should consider doing it.

Of course every applicant refused on medical grounds has the right to file for Judicial Review, spend a lot of money on it and few years of fight just to see if court can force CIC to consider applicants financial means when re-assessing medical inadmissibility. But even then court will not change the CIC decision if after consideration CIC decides to upheld inadmissibility.

Tableland

This family thought they were smarter than the CIC and tried to pull a fast one on Ottawa. They got caught out. Instead of being ashamed, they went to the British toilet papers and sold a totally bogus story. The irony, of course, being that the toilet paper in question is singularly the most critical of illegal immigrants - which is what this family attempted to be.

The whole thing is so depressing.

Gray C

Our daughter is still banned from entering Canada even for holidays and despite several more letters to CIC London recently, they have not had the courtesy to reply. Par for the course for them.

Tableland

Hi again, Gray C - hope things are well? I remembered your case when this one came up, and while my view on this one is fairly clear from the above post, I recall yours being quite different, and I can't believe you're still bothering with the CIC! Tell them to get stuffed. Did you ever get to Spain?

Gray C

Hi

Still here in England at the moment and with the Euro as it is at present we will probably stay here until it goes back up again.

As for CIC, yes I do feel like telling them to get stuffed, they are the most ignorant bunch of people on this earth in my opinion. They just do not respond to our telephone calls or letters. Such bad manners. The only reason I am trying to get her ban lifted is because I understand the ban will be picked up by other countries and as she wants to visit Disney World in Florida I want this burden lifted

We have no desires now to move to Canada anymore and as we feel at the moment, wild horses would not drag us there lol

We just think it is so unfair that they banned her because she wanted to grow a bit more. She is now almost as tall as her mother and she is in the final phase of her treatment.

Tableland

Yes I thought it looked short-sighted on the CIC's behalf, frankly, and petty, considering the nature of her condition. Still, when the pound picks up and you're sipping rioja under a palm tree in Seville, I am certain you will not be thinking about snow shovels and -40, and neither will your daughter.

Gray C

Reckon you are right and we would not miss the snow shovelling lol.

Keep in touch

Graham, Pauline and Leanne