Immigration Attorneys - What Are They Good For?

Immigration Attorneys - What Are They Good For?

When I checked my inbox this morning I found a vital e mail from a corporation of immigration professionals which I belong to.

In actual fact, this electronic mail is so crucial to my capability to observe immigration legislation that I forwarded it to all of my employees, saved it in our firm's digital address book, and printed it for inclusion within the binder that sits on my desk right by my telephone.

Yet, the truth is that this e-mail makes me feel like I'm a silent accomplice in a bit of a deception being perpetrated on the general public by CIC. Let me explain.

Residentship and Immigration Canada clearly takes great public satisfaction in the amount of knowledge and sources it supplies to the public by way of its website and call centre. CIC boasts that "All of the kinds and information that it's essential apply for a visa are available without cost on this website."

Due to this fact, it's no wonder that within the website's FAQ, the reply to the question: "Do I would like an immigration representative to help me apply?" is a "no."

The general public is told that "The Authorities of Canada treats everybody equally, whether or not they use a representative or not."

Will your case be processed more shortly if you hire a consultant? CIC advises that "In case you select to hire a representative, your software will not be given particular attention by the immigration officer."

Is this really true? Is all the knowledge you need really on the market? Do you want a lawyer? Wouldn't it make any distinction if you have one? Put another manner: are people who are using attorneys and consultants to deal with their immigration applications just throwing away their money?

I hate answering these questions since doing other folks's immigration work is how I make my living. People could be justified in being sceptical about my answers to these questions.

However the truth is "all the information you need" will not be really on the market and, sure, in lots of cases a lawyer or guide's involvement can spell the distinction between success, delay, or abject failure.

The data at is basic in nature and cannot possibly contemplate the infinite factual situations that candidates might present when applying. Additionalmore, the agents on the call centre can't and don't present callers with authorized advice. It's simply not of their mandate to do so. Instead, they provide "common information on the CIC lines of business... provide case particular information, and settle for orders for CIC publications and application kits."

In different words, they can not let you know what you 'ought to' do when confronted with obstacles or strategic choices to make.

Additionally, for those who encounter an issue that must be escalated, which shouldn't be uncommon, you will see treasured little data on the CIC website as to the place to direct your criticism or question.

Not so with immigration professionals.

The e-mail I received this morning is an update of CIC's protocol on how immigration professionals ought to direct their queries. The correspondence accommodates the email address for each Canadian visa put up abroad and the names and e mail addresses of the immigration program managers at every of these offices. It tells us how, and to whom, to direct case-particular enquiries to the Case Administration Department in Ottawa and when and how one can follow up if we do not obtain a timely reply. It supplies directions on methods to direct communications referring to high quality of service complaints, conditions involving attainable misconduct or malfeasance of immigration officers, procedures, operational and selection coverage, and processing times and levels.

To my data, this information shouldn't be shared with members of the public. CIC's failure to publicise this information doesn't mirror preferential therapy for those who are represented. Instead, it's merely an acknowledgement that immigration professionals do, and have all the time, performed an important position in making an overburdened and under-resourced program function in any respect (if not function well).

Sharing this data with the general public would lead to an avalanche of correspondence being directed at senior officers who're spread out so thinly that they could by no means get every other work done.

It is true that, except in exceptional and deserving cases, hiring a lawyer or consultant cannot get an software moved from the back of the line to the front of the line. Additionally, an officer won't approve an applicant who just isn't certified just because he or she is represented. Nevertheless, it is usually true that an trustworthy and skilled consultant will not clog up the system by submitting an utility that merely will not fly.