Scarborough Background Check

Hello Everyone, 

Well...My brother never had any criminal offence and recently he became 20 years old ....however if our background check was completed 6 months ago ...probably they wouldn't have asked for my brothers background check. however, i was wondering when did you get your AIP approval?

Well see my case is different....they requested for Background check only for mother and I about 2 years ago but recently they requested for my brothers background check. if they will take that long they should have asked for everyone at the same time. which didnt make any sense to me. Its another year wait which i am assuming!!!! I am sure they will ask for medical once again because usually it expires in 1 year once you complete it .

just a quick thought on shortening waiting time and line-ups.  show of hands.  how many here would support an additional fee, to be paid with the application.  the fee would support immigration asking for the BC as part of their investigation for the appeal at the very beginning.  at present, they are asking for it after a long wait.  this causes another long wait.  if we paid the fee for the BC we could ask that it be requested at the beginning of our first long wait...  i think that's how to say it...

and the BC check could then become part of our presentation for our appeal hearings...

no different than getting a drivers abstract with our own money to apply for a driving job or a bonded insurance position.

at present, the government pays for this BC check.   how many would be willing to pay for the B check in order to get better, more timely service?

I would...

nothing we can say or do will help anyone here.  no.  the option does not exist.  there are no options. 

there are a series of community talks coming up.  the minister will be in Toronto and Montreal to hear our views on immigration policy.  this round ( i think ) is specific to policy on work visas.  there is no sense showing up with complaints and outrage.  they are looking for ideas to make it work.  something is broken.  it needs fixing. 

i think immigration officers should be directed to collect and evaluate evidence.  the interview is where the problems start.  we arrived at the interview with a pile of documents.  any question they might ask, we had documents to pass them and show our evidence.   they asked to see the pile of papers at the very beginning.  my wife passed the documents through the slot and the officer placed the pile of documents on the shelf in front of us.  the officer refused to look at or even consider anything we gave her.  i think that we deserved at least a fair interview.  the pile sat there in front of us on their side of the window throughout the interview.  at the end they denied us.  my wife was so upset she refused to leave the room.  they called me back in to remove her.  we asked what we could have done differently.  we asked what we could do now.  they demanded that we leave.  they had made their decision.  they did not need to look at the evidence.  the interview was over.

my wife thought that our marriage certificate was proof of marriage.  she thought that they were saying that we were not married.  i do not think she realized that they were accusing her of fraud.  not of not being married.  the officer stopped, and asked to see the marriage certificate again.  i had time to think ' maybe they will look at the evidence... '  ( at the time i still thought that the marriage certificate was proof of marriage.  i did not realize that they were accusing us of fraud.) i had no idea what went wrong.  my wife passed the certificate through the slot.  the officer took the document, glanced at it to confirm it was the certificate, and then placed it on top of the pile of documents that she had refused to look at.  i would say that she sneered at us but that accusation would serve no purpose.  i know a sneer when i see one.  i do not think that it was a sneeze that she decided not to have.  i can not say that the girls did not get along.  i was not there.  i did not get to participate in her interview.

i saw the undisturbed pile of documents and i saw the marriage certificate added to it.

all i can say is that the interview itself needs to be fixed.  that is the moment where the line-ups begin.

if they actually did  a search or an investigation on the document.. that would be great.  i would not even have a concern.  i predict that they will have done no such search or authentification.  it was  a simple seizure with little purpose.  it was a coincidence that the seizure took place just after they demanded us to leave and my wife refused.  i am so proud of that little girl for standing up.  too bad she had to lose a document that her own government had distributed to her.  they had no concern if we were married or not, their concern was that she had married me for the wrong reasons.  the officer noted that they had retained our MC for their files.

if cases were treated as human resources instead of criminal investigations  then we would have already gotten to meet our case officers several times throughout the process.  the would know us and know who they were letting in.  they could have come to our house for supper... she always cooks too much for one meal...  we could have shown them and told them about what information they needed to see to help their concerns.  all they did was to identify concerns and deny us.
i think the interview process itself could be fixed.

now with the appeal... no matter what there will be required a BC.  at present, it seems as if the thinking is that they only need to request BC for files that have won the appeal.  I think that they could request the BC at the initial stage of the appeal... if they want to do a thorough check then would they not need the BC?  it would be beneficial for us to show up at the appeal hearing with our BC completed.  our demonstration would then be that we are genuine, we are paid and processed properly, and we are qualified for security passes. 

but they do not do it that way now.  maybe there is a good reason to do it the way they do it.  i cannot think of a why.  we are in effect asking them to change the order they do things in.  why should they?  if we could make it beneficial to them then maybe they could consider it.  if we were willing to pay and we could show it would be a time saving device that they could create new revenue with then it maybe they might. 

at this time, tonight tho, i can not propose that because i would be in effect spending your money.  i thought i should ask first.  what i really really need is for everyone on the board to just look at it for a minute.  tell me why the idea is crazy. tear the idea apart for me will ya? maybe people cant afford to add more fees. 

if they would simply move the request to the beginning of the process it would solve more than half the waiting problems.

and would you have said yes to the question at the very beginning of your application.    you did not have the motive you do now.  what i'm proposing is that the next poor man who comes in to fill out an application will shell out before and without even understanding what this efficiency tax is all about.

say half the appeals fail.  that is a good point for the government to refuse to request all those unnecessary BC's.

at present there is no right or proper or correct way to apply.  there is no definition of what an acceptable marriage is.  the method now is that we go and fall in love and get married and then present our case to the officers and they look it over for things they do not like.  concerns they may have.  the present system leaves us in a bind. 

show of hands was a feeler ... partly to see if we as sponsors and applicants would be willing to pay for a better more efficient system...

my fear of course is that they would think it was a good idea for applicants to pay for their own BC but they would just keep it at the end, like it is now.

the minister needs good ideas that would make a difference and that would work.  anyone have any?