Double denial!

[trailmix 77]

Yes, it was what Trailmix had used, it was a letter from her folks stating that we had agreed upon a rental arrangement and it would be ready when we arrived. The letter of proof of employment was from the Owner of a company on company letterhead stating that my wife would be starting to work for him upon her return to the US.

You know, this is hard to go through in type on a computer - we need a conference call!

Anyway, simstar had her interview what, one - two - weeks ago, with a lease and job offer and sailed through.

I think the hang up with all of these denials is that time living in Canada. This particular CO has decided to take a hard line on it.

When you sent back the proof the second time - lease etc - was there an understanding there from Montreal's side. Were they (or the CO specifically) 100% clear that you were proving 'reestablishing' domicile as opposed to the 'temporarily leaving the U.S.' proof?

I guess i'm asking if you established this with him during or after the interview while talking to him or in a cover letter with your additional proof?

[jonesg111 0]

Yes, it was what Trailmix had used, it was a letter from her folks stating that we had agreed upon a rental arrangement and it would be ready when we arrived. The letter of proof of employment was from the Owner of a company on company letterhead stating that my wife would be starting to work for him upon her return to the US.

You know, this is hard to go through in type on a computer - we need a conference call!

Anyway, simstar had her interview what, one - two - weeks ago, with a lease and job offer and sailed through.

I think the hang up with all of these denials is that time living in Canada. This particular CO has decided to take a hard line on it.

When you sent back the proof the second time - lease etc - was there an understanding there from Montreal's side. Were they (or the CO specifically) 100% clear that you were proving 'reestablishing' domicile as opposed to the 'temporarily leaving the U.S.' proof?

I guess i'm asking if you established this with him during or after the interview while talking to him or in a cover letter with your additional proof?

I would be happy to do a conference call , I was talking on the phone tonight with another member of VJ already so lets add some more to the mix.

As for the proof, he really was not specific in what he was asking for at the interview. What he did mention was that my wife would HAVE to move back before we could prove domicile. Of course the obvious problem with this is that their own paperwork that he gave us says otherwise. Like I said in previous posts, we've gone at it from both directions, firstly saying that my wife never "left" the US permanently and then secondly saying that if in their minds she had, then here is how we are showing she will reestablish domicile.

[trailmix 77]

there may be a conference call soon then!

I'm still not clear if Montreal knew what you were doing?

You decided, ok, you don't like our 'temporary' type proof - then we will show you our proof for 'reestablishing' domicile. So you knew that and I know that - but did they know that?

I understand you got their sheet, you clearly see the instructions for the other proof and you provide it - they open your envelope, they look at it an go oh - they still haven't proven she was here temporarily - denied - see what I mean.

[wmtc 0]

Man! I think it better to file for IR-1/CR-1 then filing DCF, it is becoming very hard for certain folks to prove domicile. It becoming a Hassle. Hope u folks get thru this in one peace.

A DCF gets an IR1/CR1 and if the petitioner is abroad, has to prove the same thing.

In order to file DCF don't you needs to have atleast six month residency or even hold a Canadian PR/Dual Citizen, Im confused

A DCF filer has proof domicile rite! Compare to a petitioner who is already in the US and does not have any PR in Canada, Why is it becoming so hard to proof domicile even if your following every guide that a CO give's. TO my DCF filer's i wish U all the best

[wmtc 0]

It would be a good Idea for the petitioner to re-establish domicle in US, before the interview, even if it means moving back to the state's and bieng apart from your family. Few folks here got denied for this already, and all the folks here so far got denied for the same reason (Re-establish Domicile) from the CO, But then again some folks here got their visa aproved. So it kinda confusing on What they want in Montreal.

[jonesg111 0]

there may be a conference call soon then!

I'm still not clear if Montreal knew what you were doing?

You decided, ok, you don't like our 'temporary' type proof - then we will show you our proof for 'reestablishing' domicile. So you knew that and I know that - but did they know that?

I understand you got their sheet, you clearly see the instructions for the other proof and you provide it - they open your envelope, they look at it an go oh - they still haven't proven she was here temporarily - denied - see what I mean.

Yep that makes sense, the only problem I have is how do I know that? I wish there was a way to get a clear answer as to what they're looking for. At the same time I just pulled up my cover letter and can see where I may have caused confusion with them.

Vice Consul of the United States of America;

On the ** of June 2009, I, *******, was requested to provide additional proof regarding my domicile in regards to my visa application. The following is the information we have collected in regards to this request.

1. Lease agreement, dated July 20th, 2009, between myself and place of residence in ******, where we will be living.

2. Job Offer from ****** in ****, ****. Dated July 2nd, 2009.

3. Voter's Registration.

4. CanAmerican Van Line quote for move from ***,***,***to ***,***requested for our intending leave date of November 13th, 2009.

We hope that the information we have provided will meet the requirement requested regarding domicile.

Thank you for your time and efforts.

Sincerely,

As you can see from the above cover letter I responded to the request for proof of domicile, when in reality it was my wife the USC that they wanted the information from. Do you think that if we sent in all the same information with a slightly different cover letter that is very specific as to what we're proving would that make a difference?

At the same time is there a way to find out for sure what they want? I'm still planning on having my wife call her Senator and make an inquiry to see if that can clarify anything.

[trailmix 77]

Yes, I do think it might make a difference. I would muster every scrap of information you can get to prove reestablishing domicile. I would state this very clearly in the cover letter - the reestablishing part - I would also state in the cover letter each piece of information. If explanation is needed for an item, I would state this in the letter and perhaps even follow that up with a post it on the document.

While I don't know that you can find out for sure what they want I think the guidelines can point you in the right direction. If you read what they want and it is an item you can't get, maybe try to think of where they were going with that particular item and what you could provide that would amount to the same kind of proof.

For instance, one of the items is enrolling your children in school. If you don't have any children, are you or your wife thinking of taking a class? Perhaps her enrollment in a class for January would make a difference.

It probably can't hurt to contact the Senator at this part and if he can get clarification for you - more power to him

[INK 0]

it seems as people who are getting double denied are the ones with petitioner in Canada with visitor or PR status. As you know the PR card requires you to stay in Canada for 2 years every 5 years so there is a potential conflict with US immigration at the same time. It may be prudent for petitioners to move back to ensure domicile in these cases...my 2 cents. Other explanation could be just the different CO who is more strict than others...if it happens to be the same CO in all the cases here.

[Malrothien 6]

it seems as people who are getting double denied are the ones with petitioner in Canada with visitor or PR status. As you know the PR card requires you to stay in Canada for 2 years every 5 years so there is a potential conflict with US immigration at the same time. It may be prudent for petitioners to move back to ensure domicile in these cases...my 2 cents. Other explanation could be just the different CO who is more strict than others...if it happens to be the same CO in all the cases here.

Yes, it does require 2 out of every 5 - EXCEPT if you are living with your CDN spouse. You will not lose the PR card if you are residing abroad with your CDN spouse, but you won't satisfy the physical presence count towards citizenship.

Edited November 25, 2009 by Malrothien

[trailmix 77]

it seems as people who are getting double denied are the ones with petitioner in Canada with visitor or PR status. As you know the PR card requires you to stay in Canada for 2 years every 5 years so there is a potential conflict with US immigration at the same time. It may be prudent for petitioners to move back to ensure domicile in these cases...my 2 cents. Other explanation could be just the different CO who is more strict than others...if it happens to be the same CO in all the cases here.

Actually there isn't a conflict in being a Canadian PR from a 2 out of 5 years requirement standpoint.

If a Canadian PR is in the U.S. (or any other country) with their Canadian spouse, that is considered toward maintaining Canadian residency.

(yeah what Malthroien said )

Edited November 25, 2009 by trailmix

[Revenesque 2]

it seems as people who are getting double denied are the ones with petitioner in Canada with visitor or PR status. As you know the PR card requires you to stay in Canada for 2 years every 5 years so there is a potential conflict with US immigration at the same time. It may be prudent for petitioners to move back to ensure domicile in these cases...my 2 cents. Other explanation could be just the different CO who is more strict than others...if it happens to be the same CO in all the cases here.

Actually there isn't a conflict in being a Canadian PR from a 2 out of 5 years requirement standpoint.

If a Canadian PR is in the U.S. (or any other country) with their Canadian spouse, that is considered toward maintaining Canadian residency.

(yeah what Malthroien said )

Trailmix and Malrothien, where do I find that rule "If a Canadian PR is in the U.S. (or any other country) with their Canadian spouse, that is considered toward maintaining Canadian residency"? I also thought my hubby had to live in Canada 2 out of 5 yrs.

[Malrothien 6]

it seems as people who are getting double denied are the ones with petitioner in Canada with visitor or PR status. As you know the PR card requires you to stay in Canada for 2 years every 5 years so there is a potential conflict with US immigration at the same time. It may be prudent for petitioners to move back to ensure domicile in these cases...my 2 cents. Other explanation could be just the different CO who is more strict than others...if it happens to be the same CO in all the cases here.

Actually there isn't a conflict in being a Canadian PR from a 2 out of 5 years requirement standpoint.

If a Canadian PR is in the U.S. (or any other country) with their Canadian spouse, that is considered toward maintaining Canadian residency.

(yeah what Malthroien said )

Trailmix and Malrothien, where do I find that rule "If a Canadian PR is in the U.S. (or any other country) with their Canadian spouse, that is considered toward maintaining Canadian residency"? I also thought my hubby had to live in Canada 2 out of 5 yrs.

http://www.cic.gc.ca/ENGLISH/information/a...ides/5445EA.asp

OPTION 1. Accompanying a Canadian citizen outside Canada

You may count each day that you accompanied a Canadian citizen outside Canada provided that the person you accompanied is your

* spouse or common-law partner or

* parent, if you are less than 22 years of age

Evidence that you are accompanying a Canadian citizen

You must provide supporting documents to prove that:

* The person you are accompanying is a Canadian citizen; and

* You are the spouse, common-law partner or child of that person.

Supporting documents may include:

* marriage licence

* child’s birth certificate, baptismal document, and/or adoption or guardianship document

* school and/or employment records

* association or club memberships

* passports or other travel documents

* documents indicating the status of the person you are accompanying

Edited November 25, 2009 by Malrothien

[Revenesque 2]

it seems as people who are getting double denied are the ones with petitioner in Canada with visitor or PR status. As you know the PR card requires you to stay in Canada for 2 years every 5 years so there is a potential conflict with US immigration at the same time. It may be prudent for petitioners to move back to ensure domicile in these cases...my 2 cents. Other explanation could be just the different CO who is more strict than others...if it happens to be the same CO in all the cases here.

Actually there isn't a conflict in being a Canadian PR from a 2 out of 5 years requirement standpoint.

If a Canadian PR is in the U.S. (or any other country) with their Canadian spouse, that is considered toward maintaining Canadian residency.

(yeah what Malthroien said )

Trailmix and Malrothien, where do I find that rule "If a Canadian PR is in the U.S. (or any other country) with their Canadian spouse, that is considered toward maintaining Canadian residency"? I also thought my hubby had to live in Canada 2 out of 5 yrs.

http://www.cic.gc.ca/ENGLISH/information/a...ides/5445EA.asp

OPTION 1. Accompanying a Canadian citizen outside Canada

You may count each day that you accompanied a Canadian citizen outside Canada provided that the person you accompanied is your

* spouse or common-law partner or

* parent, if you are less than 22 years of age

Evidence that you are accompanying a Canadian citizen

You must provide supporting documents to prove that:

* The person you are accompanying is a Canadian citizen; and

* You are the spouse, common-law partner or child of that person.

Supporting documents may include:

* marriage licence

* child’s birth certificate, baptismal document, and/or adoption or guardianship document

* school and/or employment records

* association or club memberships

* passports or other travel documents

* documents indicating the status of the person you are accompanying

OMG, Malrothien, you are awesome! Thanks--I learned something new today. :-)

[Malrothien 6]

Not a problem - I'm a PR myself, so gotta know it!

[Revenesque 2]

Here's another question for ya:

I'm lurking through the forums and noted that some have their interview at the Vancouver embassy. I'm just wondering why my case is assigned to Montreal (I live in Vancouver)? It would be nice to have my interview in Vancouver, save the travelling inconvenience.