Hiring a Representative

Canada Immigration Forum (discussion group)


 
       
Subject: Hiring a Representative
  Everyone has an opinion on when it is best to hire a representative. Some are correct and some are misguided due to lack of knowledge.

The correct answer depends on the type of application and your personal case.

Departed Canadian posted that representatives may be necessary in Refugee cases. That in my opinion is totally lacking in clear knowledge. This is not an attack on DC it is a clarification of the issue.

What many do not know is that there are plenty of Federal Court challenges over the procedure of how the Immigration and Refugee Board conduct refugee hearings. When one makes a refugee claim they complete a Personal Information Form and list in detail circumstances on why they believe they have a well founded fear of persecution.

Since the Refugee Board Member and/or Refugee Protection Officer asks questions first of the claimant counsel has little to do but attempt to correct any illogical comments made by the refugee claimant client.

Should Representatives be hired for Spousal sponsorships on the other hand depends on several variables.
There are three types of spousal sponsorships;
1. Overseas Spousal Sponsorships were your partner will be assessed at his/her visa post depends on whether or not there is a high bogus rate of applications from that particular visa post. Whether there is age, religious, ethnic makeup or previous marriage issues. If one partner was previously married and married the applicant soon after receiving their divorce. Whether the sponsor was unemployed or on social assistance for some time before going half way around the world to marry. Worse that the couple are unable to prove contact before and after marriage due to using phone cards because they are cheaper.

2. In Status Spousal Sponsorships can be simple or complicated based on the applicants personal circumstances. A black student from (example Kenya) has been in Canada for four years and is now on a post graduate work permit meets an Asian and marries. The Kenyan is 6´06" and the Asian is 5´01". The Asian is working at McDonalds making just over minimum wage. This could be a true and bona fide relationship or the Kenyan could be afraid of going back home due to the recent strife and picked this route instead of filing a refugee claim. The issue is the relationship must be proven well. Worse case scenario is an American and a Canadian fall in love and instead of submitting the application through Buffalo RPC they can´t stand to be apart so they abuse the preferred process and submit an In Canada application while one is a visitor.

3. Out of Status Spousal Sponsorships can appear on face value to be totally bogus. Applicant comes to Canada makes a refugee claim, fails, files leave to appeal and that fails, submits a Humanitarian and Compassionate application for PR and again the result is negative. Then just before they are called to the removals unit the applicant submits a spousal sponsorship to prevent their removal. Hundreds are submitted daily so one would have to logically assume many are real and some are bogus.

Regardless of the type of Spousal Sponsorship any applicant has to prove the relationship is genuine. That is not as easy as it seems! Certain applicants know how to read and interpret the guides and manuals, regulations and the Act correctly, others are lost at the process or take it too lightly.

FSW applicants if they meet the points should in theory be able to complete a couple of forms without assistance but what happens if they incorrectly list the wrong NOC code. All FSW applicants are suppose to be acceptable at time of application and when CIC actually starts working on the file. So what to do if you list the wrong NOC or make a mistake on the forms? Start applying again!

Appeals of removal orders, sponsorship refusals etc. need quality representatives because the appellant presents their case first as it should be in refugee cases. Spousal Sponsorship refusals can not be appealed if submitted In Land but overseas applicants have a considerably high refusal rate as well. The issue is pay less to apply or pay more after you screwed up the application and your relationship.

Federal Court Challenges have to be done by Lawyers who are members of a Provincial Law Society but in theory the appellant can do it themselves LOL The issue here is filing a leave to appeal a negative refugee decision or for a stay of removal the odds of winning are so low is it worth it.

Just because a Lawyer can appeal to the Federal court and a Consultant can not is not a sufficient reason to hire a Lawyer over any Consultant. Lawyers are not required in any province to take subjects in Immigration Law while attending Law School.

Every type of application is different. Every applicants personal circumstances are different. If the Lawyer has lots of experience and hands on control of your application it is better to hire that person then a huge Law Firm that will have some assign your file to a cute High School student with no experience to assist you. Bad Lawyers hide behind their piece of paper (Law Degree) and in most provinces can not be disciplined for professional neglegence.

Certain consultants are far better because they will actually complete your application themselves and work on a total hands on circumstance.

Regardless on who you hire get lots of references, research as much as possible and remember they are assisting you that you have responsibilities to inform the Consultant/Lawyer of all circumstances and important issues no matter how small.

The cost should be the lowest issue in your decision of which representative you hire. Research them all remembering huge Law Firms rarely have one of the partners work themselves on your file. Be sure not to take advice from someone peeping from under a toad stool pretending to be something that they are not.

Roy
www.cvimmigration.com

[14-02-2008,08:42]
[**.52.219.107]
Roy
(in reply to: Hiring a Representative)
Roy,

In my original posting regarding this I quoted refugee case just for an example. I didn´t try to say that "only" in refugee cases OR one "must" use represantative on refugee cases. I assume that the refugee cases are in general more complex than the SW class or family sponsorships. That´s why I used the term "may be".

I clearly told that whether hire or not totally depends on how complex the case is. In most of the general cases, I personally don´t see good reasons. I believe most of the members here would say the same. In the past I read similar opinions from many others.

Personally I saw both people are getting benefited by hiring an efficient represantative and got completely screwed up by inefficient/imposter ones.

You may shed some lights on what Peeping Tom said; Consultants vs Lawyers. That may be something new to all, I also don´t have any clear idea about that.

[14-02-2008,09:49]
[***.254.208.246]
Departed_Canadian
(in reply to: Hiring a Representative)
I agree, appreciate all points made by Roy. I also trust the intention of D_C, as he explained above.

To Roy´s list (above) may I add this one: # some clever candidates plan well in advance. They plan for marriage of convenience and inland spousal sponsorship. Because they need visa (normally) to enter Canada, they claim refugee status in POE. The refugee claim is only a "SIMPLE PASS" to Canada, after which they get married. So it does NOT appear as a last minute marriage, before departure. Would their explanation and declaration at the POE contradict the bonafide of their marriages, OR does it look like "LOVE FROM THE FIRST GLANCE"??????? Roy,how about those abusers? is CIC aware of that?

[14-02-2008,12:21]
[**.232.10.204]
SutarB
(in reply to: Hiring a Representative)
SutarB,

You just gave a one type of abusers. There are many types of abusers; fake marriage...fake refugee claimants....just few to add. Some stories that I know are good enough to write a best selling book.


[14-02-2008,12:45]
[***.254.208.246]
Departed_Canadian
(in reply to: Hiring a Representative)
DC,

You cannot compare an Immigration Consultant with an Immigration Lawyer. An Immigration Consultant cannot fit in the shoes of an Immigration Lawyer.
Consutants do a 6 months course, write one simple multiple choice exam and get a certificate from CSIC. Check teh CSIC website on how to become an Immigration Consultant.
A lawyer has to get a degree, write the bar exams, articled etc. The training and educational requirements are more rigorous.
A mechanic, caregiver, hairdresser goes through more rigorous training than an Immigartion Consultant.

I repeat, if you want to hire a representative, hire an Immigration Lawyer.

for most applications you do not need a representative.

Roy Kellogg was responsible for Balwant being banned from this site, would you trust this consultant?
A lawyer would never have someone banned for such frivolous matters.

[14-02-2008,12:55]
[**.158.149.34]
Peeping Tom
(in reply to: Hiring a Representative)
PT,

I read your post regarding this last night and I theoretically agree with that. I was just curious to hear what Roy says about it. He also may indicate some good points which you ignored and I don´t know.

Though that doesn´t mean that I would undermine the consultants. I believe that for most of the time professional success depends more on your personal capabilities, rather than academic backgrounds. In US immigration sites sometimes I see some ordinary folks givining accurate and innovative ideas where the lawyer of the applicants didn´t give any hope. Believe it or not, it happens. If you know TN visa then that can be an example. Most of the lawyers will tell you that you can´t process your GC from TN status. You must have to go through H-1B. Though in reality it is possible to get GC from TN status without go though H-1B.

Lawyers definitely can claim more, well justified as they have to spend vast academic life which is very competitive & expensive as well.

Consultant vs Lawyer may also involve the higher fees charged by the lawyer if they have same efficiency.

Currently I´m not in any position to think about any consultant or lawyer, but Balwant is also a consulant, correct? You seem to be very sympathetic on him, but aren´t you also trying to undermine him in that way? I know Balwant is very successful in his own community, one of his recent win also went to their national media with minsiter;s attention.

[14-02-2008,13:09]
[***.254.208.246]
Departed_Canadian
(in reply to: Hiring a Representative)
a lawyer often chooses a segment of the law as a focus. wills and estates, criminal law, contract law and in some cases immigration law. I would never expect the lawyer who specializes in contract law to have any intellectual advantage on matters of immigration from a consultant. I highly doubt that a lawyer would have more than 1-2 courses (if any) on immigration law. In that context, a full time 6 month course seems equivilent or perhaps even superior.

A consultant stakes his entire income and reputation on his immigration skills. An immigration lawyer would be in a similar position. At this point you may be able to compare the two. But as a blanket statement, I think it is frought with potential danger.

I go to my doctor for many of my aches and pains. I do not need to see the specialist... my GP has a full grasp of my needs and the solutions required. Might the specialist offer the same advice and would I feel more secure hearing it from an expert? perhaps, but is the advice the same- most likely.

Are there aches and pains that require the specialist - absolutely. Most just need a well experienced GP.


[14-02-2008,13:39]
[**.155.160.37]
Sharon
(in reply to: Hiring a Representative)
Good insights from Sharon.

Though I doubt any defence/contract lawyer would ever take any immigration case just to make some money or whether he even legally can take.

I also agree that a lawyers most likely spends a few % of his course works in school regarding immigration. So, in reality their academic knowledge shoudn´t be dramatically more than the consultants. Of course lawyers can do post grad or doctoral research on immigration.

[14-02-2008,13:49]
[***.254.208.246]
Departed_Canadian
(in reply to: Hiring a Representative)
at which point the immigration lawyer would likely have an advantage but kaching kaching. $250-300 an hour kaching.

If you are being deported and you are paralyzed, and hiding in a temple and you are fighting a escorted trip to the airport... maybe the laywer would come in handy. But get out your wallet.

correction to PT, Roy was not responsible for Balwant being banned from this forum. Balwant did it all by himself. And that was after reading all the rules.


[14-02-2008,13:57]
[**.155.160.37]
Sharon
(in reply to: Hiring a Representative)
sharon

For your information (to all)

GP is a doctor. GP is a graduate doctor who has his/her specialty as GP. GP is a professional and as valuable as any other doc (you call as specilaist).

This is just for correction. So please find another example and correct what you said.

[14-02-2008,14:10]
[**.232.10.204]
SutarB
(in reply to: Hiring a Representative)
OK, make it a registerd nurse and a GP. the point is the same. 95% of the issues can be handled by the nurse.

In Canadian medical system, you go to your GP first and if they are stumped they send you to the specialist.

[14-02-2008,14:17]
[**.155.160.37]
Sharon
(in reply to: Hiring a Representative)
Sorry to close this post.

Lawyers and Physicians probably can´t be compared. Unlike the physicians, lawyers can´t be General Lawyer (unlike the GPs). They always have to be specialized in either criminal, coroporate..immigration..or any other sides. That is my understanding about the law profession.

That´s why for immigration purpose you must have to look for an immigration lawyers, not coroporate or criminal.

Physicians can be either specialized or GP.

[14-02-2008,14:19]
[***.254.208.246]
Departed_Canadian