|
|
| Subject: Not high enough... |
|
|
|
My sister in law applied as a SW and was asked to take the IELST test she scored 6.0 and sent her results to the CIC in London... she got a reply telling her that her application was being denied due to the lack of sufficient points... they told her she actually needed all the point she could get in order to have the minimum required... so my question is...
Is that it for her?
or
could she ask for a chance to take the test again...
Must she start over with a new application?
Please help...
Thanks
[30-12-2007,11:58]
[***.229.236.247]
Nohope? |
|
(in reply to: Not high enough...)
This seems one of thos situations I mentioned in CIFA Part 2 you probaly need someone to assist you in obtaining sufficent points.
Language is not based on an overall IELTS score but an idividual score for each of the four categories.
Did she mentioned and provide proof of your husband. Had she sought out arranged employment? etc. etc.
Possibly the love in her life may want to join her in immigrating and he/she would provide additional points etc. etc.
Roy
www.cvimmigration.com
[30-12-2007,12:40]
[**.52.219.48]
Roy |
Thanks.. (in reply to: Not high enough...)
I am afraid you are right!
This is a mistake that occured due to not having enough or the correct information... actually she is married and she applied as the principal applicant because (ironically) her English is better that her husband´s... They decided to complete the application on their own but overlooked the importance of the IELST scores and decided to send the score at once without trying to get a better score...
Thanks a lot for your reply...
[30-12-2007,13:06]
[***.229.236.247]
Lily |
(in reply to: Not high enough...)
Ah ah ah. The name ´nohope´ you choose is not encouraging.
You need to keep in mind that there is always hope and always many options offerd to you.
Yes, she can always ask for another opportunity to take the test, but I believe there is a waiting period of certain number of days before she?ll take the test.
I recommend her to visit these links to prepare for the test:
http://www.psc-cfp.gc.ca/ppc/sle_pg_01a_e.htm
http://www.psc-cfp.gc.ca/ppc/sle_pg_03_e.htm
I don?t believe you need, for the moment an immigration consultant, it is always good to use all the options you have between you hand before you choose an expensive one.
Next week, I may be able to provide you examples used by the Canadian Government as an assessment tool.
Hpe it helps.
Regards,
[30-12-2007,20:09]
[***.129.36.231]
Fishing fither(Ex needs help or can help) |
(in reply to: Not high enough...)
OK folks, let´s read the orginial post again.
CIC has rejected the application - the applicant is short the 67 points. She needed all 16 for language - she is not even close.
The way I understand it... the file is closed. There are no appeals on Skilled Worker applications. You either have the points or your don´t. She doesn´t and sadly, had the application been filed differently, there may have been a chance at a different outcome.
So, Fishing Fighter... there is no overtime on this game. I think the file dies after 90 days. I don´t even know if she gets the 90 day. Exhausting all the options is not an option.
She may need to begin a new application but realize that she will need to do something very different than the first application to be successul. Sounds like she left a lot of opportunities unexplored.
[30-12-2007,21:07]
[***.121.220.199]
Sharon |
(in reply to: Not high enough...)
Thanks a lot for your replies... Sharon, thank you for being so attentive...
[31-12-2007,01:45]
[***.229.236.217]
Lily |
(in reply to: Not high enough...)
"She scored 6 and she needs 16, she even note close". Sharon, I totally agree with you at this point.
I, probably, can agree with you when you say: "she may need to begin a new application but realize that she will need to do something very different than the first application to be successful".
In my mind, she needs to improve her English skills to make her application successful. I cannot think about some thing else. In her case, and for the moment, what is blocking her is luck of capacity to communicate in one of the official languages. I don´t believe a consultant can make her application interesting in certain way, if she doesn´t try to improve her communication skills.
I can believe that the applicant when she is stressed out, she could describe her healthy problem (if she has one and not a major one) in a negative way that could scare the CIC officer. This could be applied to the applicants with criminal record too (In some cases, people who were put in jail because they were saying their opinions). Then of course, in these kinds of situations, I would suggest a consultant or lawyer who offer them the first consultation for free. Please, remember, generally the applicants are not rich.
With the first consultation for free, the consultant or lawyer can hear their whole situation and let them know if their application will be a success or not.
I cannot believe that all applications can be success when they go through consultant or lawyer.
Let me share with you one of the stories that chocked me. I met one day, a refugee, saying that he came to Canada to make a lot of money and improve his life, but when he show me the application he prepared with his lawyer, it says that he run away from his country because, some criminals want to kill him. When, I asked him, why the criminals want to kill him? He replied:? I didn?t have problems with criminals in my countries, this is what lawyer asked me to put to make my application successful?. They are some people like this refugee who can do any thing to get what they want, no matter if it is a small or huge lie.
Please note that I?m not saying that all lawyers and consultants are the same.
At the end this is my point of view and it is up to Lily to decide if he needs or not a consultant or lawyer for his siter in law.
Hope I clarified my point of view.
Regards,
[31-12-2007,13:05]
[***.103.184.76]
Hoper (EX: fishing fighter) |
(in reply to: Not high enough...)
based on the reply to Roy, it would appear that several opportunities for additional points were overlooked.
I don´t like laywers or consultants either but sometimes, in the right circumstances... they save a lot of grief.
[31-12-2007,15:41]
[***.121.220.199]
Sharon |
(in reply to: Not high enough...)
Sharon again you are a real ´folks´ your favorite word, remember.
This is defamation. If you don?t like lawyers and consultant, it is youuuuuuuuuuuuur business but don?t try to modify what people are saying to spread dangerous ideas.
Any one with Basic English can understand that is nothing saying such stupidities in my replies.
I was saying that I wouldn?t suggest lawyers or consultant to the sample cases like you are doing at almost 80% of your replies. And the point you are suggesting only one consultant no diversity with you. Even if I suggest one, for sure it will not be some one like you who has no respect for Canadian Democracy and for Canadians.
[05-01-2008,17:31]
[***.123.3.130]
Fishing Fighter |
(in reply to: Not high enough...)
may I suggest you redo your math. You will find a historical body of evidence to suggest I am the first person to suggest CIC forms only require the ability to read and answer questions clearly.
HOWEVER, there are times when the combination of circumstances, the law and the abilities of the candidate would be better served when there is assistance. I make no apology for suggesting help when it is warranted.
[05-01-2008,18:17]
[***.121.220.199]
Sharon |
|
