加拿大华人论坛 加拿大留学移民Letter to Tim on behalf of ME'd Group
在加拿大
Thanks Tim, for your very timely response!Damages (ME cost, lost wages) aside, our cases do present significant difference from the unassessed cases:1. Theses cases have been assessed and SD made, so totally qualified and there is no merit argument. Presumably these cases are more convincing than your leading case from this perspective, assessed and approved by CIC itself!2. There are clear comparison cases in this scenario, more than a dozen of the post-March 29 assesses cases have been finalized, and indeed landed in Canada, which proves the unjustifiable cut off date.3. These are all Hong Kong applicants who can prove that there is not even ONE single case that was assessed before March 29 for the whole 6 years since they adopted the simplified process. Well, your winning arguments on June 14 were delay as a result of Minster's fault.4. These group of applicants suffered most from the ever changing OB instructions, first, requesting us to submit documents, then OB400 asked us to stop submitting, then again ask us to continue to submit documents.5. They even cashed most of our landing fees, knowing they are going to terminate us? 6. We are closest to the 150 computer mistakened cases whereby Minister privilege was exercised, only that probably not the computer was making mistakes, the consulate and visa officers were making life-changing mistakes.7. I can tell you a couple of us failed before June 29, only because we studied or lived in Canada (which entailed the background check), isn't ridiculous and against Minster's intention to take more applicants that would be able to adapt to Canada?You are our loved counsel, and we will of course defer to your best judgment! Would really love to hear from you about your further action plan!Thanks again, on behalf of the entire group!
评论
回复: Letter to Tim on behalf of ME'd Group绝对支持向他施加压力！！！！ ME被切的白白耽误大半年 614前有判决的人也被白白耽误大半年 真的是忍无可忍了
评论
超赞 赏 L Les Paradis 0$(VIP 0) 3,7882012-12-21#3 回复: Letter to Tim on behalf of ME'd Group应该再加上一条： You should have filed our group's case as a seperate proceeding a long time ago, should have never waited until the denial of the motion. We want our own court's decision!
评论
应该再加上一条： You should have filed our group's case as a seperate proceeding a long time ago, should have never waited until the denial of the motion. We want our own court's decision!点击展开... 但你这样说，得考虑另一种可能性，如果违宪诉讼胜诉，tim组等于变相插队。这也不合理啊。
评论
回复: Letter to Tim on behalf of ME'd Group但你这样说，得考虑另一种可能性，如果违宪诉讼胜诉，tim组等于变相插队。这也不合理啊。点击展开... ME被切的本来就ME了，已经完成了至少95%的程序了，难道他们排在你们没S2的人的后面才叫合理？？？
评论
ME被切的本来就ME了，已经完成了至少95%的程序了，难道他们排在你们没S2的人的后面才叫合理？？？点击展开... 这个我不清楚，但我猜想，329后新加入的应该有很多排队不靠前的吧？
评论
回复: Letter to Tim on behalf of ME'd Group你引用的我的帖子指的是讨论ME被切的，这个帖子讨论的也是ME被切的人的起诉，怎么又扯到“329后新加入的应该有很多排队不靠前的吧”？
评论
超赞 赏 X xiaohuilinlin 0$(VIP 0) 292012-12-21#8 回复: Letter to Tim on behalf of ME'd GroupTotally agree with Milky. I also wrote to Tim and pointed out that for that leading case, CIC would argue such qualified applicants will get faster processing by elimating the huge backlog. The date 3.29 is most ridiculous for HK ME Group.
评论
FN:2007.2.09S2:2012.2.13补料:2012.5.08ME：2012.6.27 超赞 赏 我 我是流氓我怕谁 0$(VIP 0) 1672012-12-21#9 回复: Letter to Tim on behalf of ME'd GroupTotally agree with Milky! ME'd people, please all voice your opinion to Tim or your representatives.
评论
回复: Letter to Tim on behalf of ME'd GroupI can agree more with the statement:The date 3.29 is most ridiculous for HK ME Group.
评论
回复: Letter to Tim on behalf of ME'd GroupI can't agree more with the statement:The date 3.29 is most ridiculous for HK ME Group.
评论
回复: Letter to Tim on behalf of ME'd Group李克伦为台湾7个ME被切的打官司，官司的性质是class action，他把世界范围内所有ME被切的设置为class，就是说，如果他赢了，不仅7个人要获得签证，所有其他没参加的ME被切的都要获得签证。 如果李克伦成功了，他就给了TIM一记响亮的耳光。为什么李克伦认为ME被切的与C38无关，TIM却要主动送死承认这些人被切了？还要主动送死C38前有判决的635人也被一刀切了？ 不仅如此，李克伦还会名利双收，他虽然只收了7个人的律师费，但官司成功后，CIC要给他支付所有ME被切的人的律师费。 TIM从7月就收了几十个ME被切的，到现在什么进展都没有，吃力不讨好啊。 李克伦不仅羞辱了TIM，还羞辱了所有其他律师：王仁铎，LW等等手里有ME被切的案子的律师。
·生活百科 Sonnen电池查询
·生活百科 失调SolarWeb（SmartMeter）和零售商