immigration law
Jan 16th 2004, 4:10 am
#1
Just Joined
Thread Starter
Joined: Dec 2003
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Posts: 18
immigration law
Canada Immigration would not allow a person to apply for permanent residency unless you had lived in Canada for a period of 5 years. This has now been reduced to 3 years. Can anyone tell me when this was changed?
Jan 16th 2004, 4:27 am
#2
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: immigration law
What are you talking about?!
--
../..
Andrew Miller
Immigration Consultant
Vancouver, British Columbia
email: [email protected]
(delete REMOVE from the above address before sending email)
________________________________
"fritz16" <member18447@british_expats.com> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Canada Immigration would not allow a person to apply for permanent
> residency unless you had lived in Canada for a period of 5 years.
> This has now been reduced to 3 years. Can anyone tell me when this
> was changed?
> --
> fritz16
> Posted via http://britishexpats.com
--
../..
Andrew Miller
Immigration Consultant
Vancouver, British Columbia
email: [email protected]
(delete REMOVE from the above address before sending email)
________________________________
"fritz16" <member18447@british_expats.com> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Canada Immigration would not allow a person to apply for permanent
> residency unless you had lived in Canada for a period of 5 years.
> This has now been reduced to 3 years. Can anyone tell me when this
> was changed?
> --
> fritz16
> Posted via http://britishexpats.com
Jan 16th 2004, 4:48 am
#3
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: immigration law
There is no such law.
--
../..
Andrew Miller
Immigration Consultant
Vancouver, British Columbia
email: [email protected]
(delete REMOVE from the above address before sending email)
________________________________
"fritz16" <member18447@british_expats.com> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Canada Immigration would not allow a person to apply for permanent
> residency unless you had lived in Canada for a period of 5 years.
> This has now been reduced to 3 years. Can anyone tell me when this
> was changed?
> --
> fritz16
> Posted via http://britishexpats.com
--
../..
Andrew Miller
Immigration Consultant
Vancouver, British Columbia
email: [email protected]
(delete REMOVE from the above address before sending email)
________________________________
"fritz16" <member18447@british_expats.com> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Canada Immigration would not allow a person to apply for permanent
> residency unless you had lived in Canada for a period of 5 years.
> This has now been reduced to 3 years. Can anyone tell me when this
> was changed?
> --
> fritz16
> Posted via http://britishexpats.com
Jan 16th 2004, 11:12 am
#4
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: immigration law
Are you taking any medication right now. Where on earth are you getting your
information from.
"fritz16" <member18447@british_expats.com> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Canada Immigration would not allow a person to apply for permanent
> residency unless you had lived in Canada for a period of 5 years.
> This has now been reduced to 3 years. Can anyone tell me when this
> was changed?
> --
> fritz16
> Posted via http://britishexpats.com
information from.
"fritz16" <member18447@british_expats.com> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Canada Immigration would not allow a person to apply for permanent
> residency unless you had lived in Canada for a period of 5 years.
> This has now been reduced to 3 years. Can anyone tell me when this
> was changed?
> --
> fritz16
> Posted via http://britishexpats.com
Jan 16th 2004, 11:57 am
#5
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: immigration law
No, that is true for Mars immigration.
You have to live there for 3 years before you can apply to become a PR.
And yes, the application has to be mailed to the 6th moon of Jupiter.
"fritz16" <member18447@british_expats.com> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Canada Immigration would not allow a person to apply for permanent
> residency unless you had lived in Canada for a period of 5 years.
> This has now been reduced to 3 years. Can anyone tell me when this
> was changed?
> --
> fritz16
> Posted via http://britishexpats.com
You have to live there for 3 years before you can apply to become a PR.
And yes, the application has to be mailed to the 6th moon of Jupiter.
"fritz16" <member18447@british_expats.com> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Canada Immigration would not allow a person to apply for permanent
> residency unless you had lived in Canada for a period of 5 years.
> This has now been reduced to 3 years. Can anyone tell me when this
> was changed?
> --
> fritz16
> Posted via http://britishexpats.com
Jan 16th 2004, 1:16 pm
#6
Forum Regular
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 31
Re: immigration law
Are you talking about Canadian Citizenship?
Jan 16th 2004, 1:34 pm
#7
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: immigration law
Are you talking about Canadian citizenship, as opposed to Immigration?
Maybe the law used to require five years of residency before applying for
citizenship? It's been at three years since I first checked the
requirements, but that was in 2002, not that long ago.
Renee
--
Inland Spouse Timeline so far (U.S. Citizen):
19 Feb 2003: Moved to Calgary from U.S. on 6 month TRV
12 May 2003: Did medicals in Calgary
20 June 2003: Applied for TRV extension
5 July 2003: Wedding Date
17 July 2003: CIC received inland spouse PR application
15 Aug 2003: Received 6 month TRV extension
20 Aug 2003: CIC request for work history dates (which were sent with
application)
21 Aug 2003: CIC received work history reply by overnight post
4 Sept 2003: CIC e-Client finally shows "in process"
"fritz16" <member18447@british_expats.com> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Canada Immigration would not allow a person to apply for permanent
> residency unless you had lived in Canada for a period of 5 years.
> This has now been reduced to 3 years. Can anyone tell me when this
> was changed?
> --
> fritz16
> Posted via http://britishexpats.com
Maybe the law used to require five years of residency before applying for
citizenship? It's been at three years since I first checked the
requirements, but that was in 2002, not that long ago.
Renee
--
Inland Spouse Timeline so far (U.S. Citizen):
19 Feb 2003: Moved to Calgary from U.S. on 6 month TRV
12 May 2003: Did medicals in Calgary
20 June 2003: Applied for TRV extension
5 July 2003: Wedding Date
17 July 2003: CIC received inland spouse PR application
15 Aug 2003: Received 6 month TRV extension
20 Aug 2003: CIC request for work history dates (which were sent with
application)
21 Aug 2003: CIC received work history reply by overnight post
4 Sept 2003: CIC e-Client finally shows "in process"
"fritz16" <member18447@british_expats.com> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Canada Immigration would not allow a person to apply for permanent
> residency unless you had lived in Canada for a period of 5 years.
> This has now been reduced to 3 years. Can anyone tell me when this
> was changed?
> --
> fritz16
> Posted via http://britishexpats.com
Jan 16th 2004, 3:42 pm
#8
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: immigration law
Renee wrote:
>
> Are you talking about Canadian citizenship, as opposed to Immigration?
> Maybe the law used to require five years of residency before applying for
> citizenship? It's been at three years since I first checked the
> requirements, but that was in 2002, not that long ago.
>
> Renee
Or he's got confused with the "retaining Canadian PR laws" ?
Whatever, he's got a good dose of hyper-confusion.
>
> Are you talking about Canadian citizenship, as opposed to Immigration?
> Maybe the law used to require five years of residency before applying for
> citizenship? It's been at three years since I first checked the
> requirements, but that was in 2002, not that long ago.
>
> Renee
Or he's got confused with the "retaining Canadian PR laws" ?
Whatever, he's got a good dose of hyper-confusion.
Jan 16th 2004, 5:02 pm
#9
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: immigration law
Actually, I found something in the IP1 manual while I was looking for
something else. Perhaps this is what the original poster is referring to:
5.11 - Granting of permanent residence to members of the permit holders
class
Permit holders may become permanent residents of Canada if:
- they have resided continuously in Canada for at least three years,
continue to be medically inadmissable for the medical reasons that existed
on entry and have not become inadmissible on other grounds including new
health reasons; or
- have resided continuously in Canada for at least five years, continue to
be inadmissible for the grounds identified prior to entry and are not
inadmissible on any other grounds; and
- have not, since the issue of their permit, become inadmissible on any
other ground; and
- make an application under the permit holders class and pay the
corresponding processing fee.
I hadn't read that before, but when I saw it a few minutes ago, this thread
came to mind.
Renee
--
Inland Spouse Timeline so far (U.S. Citizen):
19 Feb 2003: Moved to Calgary from U.S. on 6 month TRV
12 May 2003: Did medicals in Calgary
20 June 2003: Applied for TRV extension
5 July 2003: Wedding Date
17 July 2003: CIC received inland spouse PR application
15 Aug 2003: Received 6 month TRV extension
20 Aug 2003: CIC request for work history dates (which were sent with
application)
21 Aug 2003: CIC received work history reply by overnight post
4 Sept 2003: CIC e-Client finally shows "in process"
21 Nov 2003: Applied for second TRV extension
16 Jan 2004: Received second 6 month TRV extension
"S B" <[email protected]. invalid> wrote in
message news:[email protected]...
> Renee wrote:
> >
> > Are you talking about Canadian citizenship, as opposed to Immigration?
> > Maybe the law used to require five years of residency before applying
for
> > citizenship? It's been at three years since I first checked the
> > requirements, but that was in 2002, not that long ago.
> >
> > Renee
> Or he's got confused with the "retaining Canadian PR laws" ?
> Whatever, he's got a good dose of hyper-confusion.
something else. Perhaps this is what the original poster is referring to:
5.11 - Granting of permanent residence to members of the permit holders
class
Permit holders may become permanent residents of Canada if:
- they have resided continuously in Canada for at least three years,
continue to be medically inadmissable for the medical reasons that existed
on entry and have not become inadmissible on other grounds including new
health reasons; or
- have resided continuously in Canada for at least five years, continue to
be inadmissible for the grounds identified prior to entry and are not
inadmissible on any other grounds; and
- have not, since the issue of their permit, become inadmissible on any
other ground; and
- make an application under the permit holders class and pay the
corresponding processing fee.
I hadn't read that before, but when I saw it a few minutes ago, this thread
came to mind.
Renee
--
Inland Spouse Timeline so far (U.S. Citizen):
19 Feb 2003: Moved to Calgary from U.S. on 6 month TRV
12 May 2003: Did medicals in Calgary
20 June 2003: Applied for TRV extension
5 July 2003: Wedding Date
17 July 2003: CIC received inland spouse PR application
15 Aug 2003: Received 6 month TRV extension
20 Aug 2003: CIC request for work history dates (which were sent with
application)
21 Aug 2003: CIC received work history reply by overnight post
4 Sept 2003: CIC e-Client finally shows "in process"
21 Nov 2003: Applied for second TRV extension
16 Jan 2004: Received second 6 month TRV extension
"S B" <[email protected]. invalid> wrote in
message news:[email protected]...
> Renee wrote:
> >
> > Are you talking about Canadian citizenship, as opposed to Immigration?
> > Maybe the law used to require five years of residency before applying
for
> > citizenship? It's been at three years since I first checked the
> > requirements, but that was in 2002, not that long ago.
> >
> > Renee
> Or he's got confused with the "retaining Canadian PR laws" ?
> Whatever, he's got a good dose of hyper-confusion.
Jan 16th 2004, 8:44 pm
#10
Just Joined
Thread Starter
Joined: Dec 2003
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Posts: 18
Re: immigration law
Originally posted by Renee
Actually, I found something in the IP1 manual while I was looking for
something else. Perhaps this is what the original poster is referring to:
5.11 - Granting of permanent residence to members of the permit holders
class
Permit holders may become permanent residents of Canada if:
- they have resided continuously in Canada for at least three years,
continue to be medically inadmissable for the medical reasons that existed
on entry and have not become inadmissible on other grounds including new
health reasons; or
- have resided continuously in Canada for at least five years, continue to
be inadmissible for the grounds identified prior to entry and are not
inadmissible on any other grounds; and
- have not, since the issue of their permit, become inadmissible on any
other ground; and
- make an application under the permit holders class and pay the
corresponding processing fee.
I hadn't read that before, but when I saw it a few minutes ago, this thread
came to mind.
Renee
.
--
Inland Spouse Timeline so far (U.S. Citizen):
19 Feb 2003: Moved to Calgary from U.S. on 6 month TRV
12 May 2003: Did medicals in Calgary
20 June 2003: Applied for TRV extension
5 July 2003: Wedding Date
17 July 2003: CIC received inland spouse PR application
15 Aug 2003: Received 6 month TRV extension
20 Aug 2003: CIC request for work history dates (which were sent with
application)
21 Aug 2003: CIC received work history reply by overnight post
4 Sept 2003: CIC e-Client finally shows "in process"
21 Nov 2003: Applied for second TRV extension
16 Jan 2004: Received second 6 month TRV extension
"S B" <[email protected]. invalid> wrote in
message news:[email protected]...
> Renee wrote:
> >
> > Are you talking about Canadian citizenship, as opposed to Immigration?
> > Maybe the law used to require five years of residency before applying
for
> > citizenship? It's been at three years since I first checked the
> > requirements, but that was in 2002, not that long ago.
> >
> > Renee
> Or he's got confused with the "retaining Canadian PR laws" ?
> Whatever, he's got a good dose of hyper-confusion.
Actually, I found something in the IP1 manual while I was looking for
something else. Perhaps this is what the original poster is referring to:
5.11 - Granting of permanent residence to members of the permit holders
class
Permit holders may become permanent residents of Canada if:
- they have resided continuously in Canada for at least three years,
continue to be medically inadmissable for the medical reasons that existed
on entry and have not become inadmissible on other grounds including new
health reasons; or
- have resided continuously in Canada for at least five years, continue to
be inadmissible for the grounds identified prior to entry and are not
inadmissible on any other grounds; and
- have not, since the issue of their permit, become inadmissible on any
other ground; and
- make an application under the permit holders class and pay the
corresponding processing fee.
I hadn't read that before, but when I saw it a few minutes ago, this thread
came to mind.
Renee
.
--
Inland Spouse Timeline so far (U.S. Citizen):
19 Feb 2003: Moved to Calgary from U.S. on 6 month TRV
12 May 2003: Did medicals in Calgary
20 June 2003: Applied for TRV extension
5 July 2003: Wedding Date
17 July 2003: CIC received inland spouse PR application
15 Aug 2003: Received 6 month TRV extension
20 Aug 2003: CIC request for work history dates (which were sent with
application)
21 Aug 2003: CIC received work history reply by overnight post
4 Sept 2003: CIC e-Client finally shows "in process"
21 Nov 2003: Applied for second TRV extension
16 Jan 2004: Received second 6 month TRV extension
"S B" <[email protected]. invalid> wrote in
message news:[email protected]...
> Renee wrote:
> >
> > Are you talking about Canadian citizenship, as opposed to Immigration?
> > Maybe the law used to require five years of residency before applying
for
> > citizenship? It's been at three years since I first checked the
> > requirements, but that was in 2002, not that long ago.
> >
> > Renee
> Or he's got confused with the "retaining Canadian PR laws" ?
> Whatever, he's got a good dose of hyper-confusion.
Thank you so much for your posting Renee, now I don't have to go to Mars or even bother to reply to the other unkind replies, so speedily posted
Jan 16th 2004, 10:16 pm
#11
Forum Regular
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 96
Re: immigration law
It is funny that many people just jumped on the OP.
In a public forum like this, there could be lame (or misinformed) questions though lame answers are not warranted.
I guess everyone is not an expert on immigration matters.
It is my opinion, not aimed at anybody.
In a public forum like this, there could be lame (or misinformed) questions though lame answers are not warranted.
I guess everyone is not an expert on immigration matters.
It is my opinion, not aimed at anybody.
Originally posted by fritz16
Thank you so much for your posting Renee, now I don't have to go to Mars or even bother to reply to the other unkind replies, so speedily posted
Thank you so much for your posting Renee, now I don't have to go to Mars or even bother to reply to the other unkind replies, so speedily posted
Last edited by khvganesh; Jan 16th 2004 at 10:28 pm.
Jan 16th 2004, 10:45 pm
#12
Just Joined
Thread Starter
Joined: Dec 2003
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Posts: 18
Re: immigration law
Originally posted by khvganesh
It is funny that many people just jumped on the OP.
In a public forum like this, there could be lame (or misinformed) questions though lame answers are not warranted.
I guess everyone is not an expert on immigration matters.
It is my opinion, not aimed at anybody.
It is funny that many people just jumped on the OP.
In a public forum like this, there could be lame (or misinformed) questions though lame answers are not warranted.
I guess everyone is not an expert on immigration matters.
It is my opinion, not aimed at anybody.
Thank you for your reply. Maybe the unkind or lame replies were due to the fact that I posted incorrectly. Unfortunately the replies hit home. I am on medication, for my heart, a health problem I had when I came to Canada in 1996. Almost 8 years I have had to apply for Minister's permits and extensions on that permit. Unfortunately my health does not improve with all the stress, so unkind replies were something I did not need. I am terrified that the Canadian government could just say NO go back to UK.
Jan 16th 2004, 10:50 pm
#13
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: immigration law
fritz16 <member18447@british_expats.com> writes:
> Canada Immigration would not allow a person to apply for permanent
> residency unless you had lived in Canada for a period of 5 years.
> This has now been reduced to 3 years. Can anyone tell me when this
> was changed?
Well, basically anyone can apply for the Permanent Residency. You need to
live 2 out of 5 years to KEEP your PR status.
--
Peter Wu
Powered by Gentoo Linux 2.4.22
> Canada Immigration would not allow a person to apply for permanent
> residency unless you had lived in Canada for a period of 5 years.
> This has now been reduced to 3 years. Can anyone tell me when this
> was changed?
Well, basically anyone can apply for the Permanent Residency. You need to
live 2 out of 5 years to KEEP your PR status.
--
Peter Wu
Powered by Gentoo Linux 2.4.22
Jan 17th 2004, 1:33 am
#14
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: immigration law
This is fishy. The CIC does not want to keep issuing permits to someone in
your position and that is why they lowered the time to 3 years. Since you
long ago qualified for landing, and that has not been done, there seems to
be some other problem or this is another prank.
--
Jim Humphries, former visa officer
"fritz16" <member18447@british_expats.com> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Originally posted by khvganesh
> > It is funny that many people just jumped on the OP.
> >
> > In a public forum like this, there could be lame (or misinformed)
> > questions though lame answers are not warranted.
> >
> > I guess everyone is not an expert on immigration matters.
> >
> > It is my opinion, not aimed at anybody.
> Thank you for your reply. Maybe the unkind or lame replies were due to
> the fact that I posted incorrectly. Unfortunately the replies hit home.
> I am on medication, for my heart, a health problem I had when I came to
> Canada in 1996. Almost 8 years I have had to apply for Minister's
> permits and extensions on that permit. Unfortunately my health does
> not improve with all the stress, so unkind replies were something I did
> not need. I am terrified that the Canadian government could just say NO
> go back to UK.
> --
> fritz16
> Posted via http://britishexpats.com
your position and that is why they lowered the time to 3 years. Since you
long ago qualified for landing, and that has not been done, there seems to
be some other problem or this is another prank.
--
Jim Humphries, former visa officer
"fritz16" <member18447@british_expats.com> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Originally posted by khvganesh
> > It is funny that many people just jumped on the OP.
> >
> > In a public forum like this, there could be lame (or misinformed)
> > questions though lame answers are not warranted.
> >
> > I guess everyone is not an expert on immigration matters.
> >
> > It is my opinion, not aimed at anybody.
> Thank you for your reply. Maybe the unkind or lame replies were due to
> the fact that I posted incorrectly. Unfortunately the replies hit home.
> I am on medication, for my heart, a health problem I had when I came to
> Canada in 1996. Almost 8 years I have had to apply for Minister's
> permits and extensions on that permit. Unfortunately my health does
> not improve with all the stress, so unkind replies were something I did
> not need. I am terrified that the Canadian government could just say NO
> go back to UK.
> --
> fritz16
> Posted via http://britishexpats.com
Jan 17th 2004, 3:59 am
#15
Just Joined
Thread Starter
Joined: Dec 2003
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Posts: 18
Re: immigration law
Originally posted by Jim Humphries
This is fishy. The CIC does not want to keep issuing permits to someone in
your position and that is why they lowered the time to 3 years. Since you
long ago qualified for landing, and that has not been done, there seems to
be some other problem or this is another prank.
--
Jim Humphries, former visa officer
"fritz16" <member18447@british_expats.com> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Originally posted by khvganesh
> > It is funny that many people just jumped on the OP.
> >
> > In a public forum like this, there could be lame (or misinformed)
> > questions though lame answers are not warranted.
> >
> > I guess everyone is not an expert on immigration matters.
> >
> > It is my opinion, not aimed at anybody.
> Thank you for your reply. Maybe the unkind or lame replies were due to
> the fact that I posted incorrectly. Unfortunately the replies hit home.
> I am on medication, for my heart, a health problem I had when I came to
> Canada in 1996. Almost 8 years I have had to apply for Minister's
> permits and extensions on that permit. Unfortunately my health does
> not improve with all the stress, so unkind replies were something I did
> not need. I am terrified that the Canadian government could just say NO
> go back to UK.
> --
> fritz16
> Posted via http://britishexpats.com
This is fishy. The CIC does not want to keep issuing permits to someone in
your position and that is why they lowered the time to 3 years. Since you
long ago qualified for landing, and that has not been done, there seems to
be some other problem or this is another prank.
--
Jim Humphries, former visa officer
"fritz16" <member18447@british_expats.com> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Originally posted by khvganesh
> > It is funny that many people just jumped on the OP.
> >
> > In a public forum like this, there could be lame (or misinformed)
> > questions though lame answers are not warranted.
> >
> > I guess everyone is not an expert on immigration matters.
> >
> > It is my opinion, not aimed at anybody.
> Thank you for your reply. Maybe the unkind or lame replies were due to
> the fact that I posted incorrectly. Unfortunately the replies hit home.
> I am on medication, for my heart, a health problem I had when I came to
> Canada in 1996. Almost 8 years I have had to apply for Minister's
> permits and extensions on that permit. Unfortunately my health does
> not improve with all the stress, so unkind replies were something I did
> not need. I am terrified that the Canadian government could just say NO
> go back to UK.
> --
> fritz16
> Posted via http://britishexpats.com
