Editor’s Note: The Author, Bruce Perreault, B.A., LL.B., K.H.S., CCIC is the author of a new book to be published in January 2007 entitled “The Making of CSIC: How the Battle was Almost Lost”. The book describes the lonely Journey of John Ryan to Ottawa, the intrigue that followed, the birth of CSIC. It describes in detail the groups that formed throughout Canada of Consultants that attempted to derail the process but were ultimately defeated. It gives an interesting look into one group in particular which was best described as “The Loonies” in a Chapter that is devoted to a look into the insane world that used the internet to defame, libel and slander Consultants from Coast to Coast. You have to read it to believe it! The book is a must from cover to cover. It will be available however, only in hardback, and at a high cost of $49.00 at Bookstores throughout Canada.
The CAPIC TIMES Vol. 1, Issue 10
Reproduced with Permission from The CAPIC Times
BREAKING NEWS!The 2nd Annual CAPIC-ACCPI National Education Seminar Friday, November 24, 2006 has ended. It was a smashing success, and proves, we have finally made it as a Profession and, within that Profession, CAPIC has demonstrated that it represents ALL consultants, whether or not they are members. The educational seminar presented was highly instructive and of great help to the practitioner to advise and counsel clients in a manner now demanded from the public, the Regulator and CICThe Panels were very informative and the speakers, without doubt, the best in this country on the topics of Immigration (the author being excluded from the word “best”) which included the Minister of Immigration of Ontario and all the Federal Government experts (of which there were many) and a confident John Ryan, representing the Regulator, who seemed to be able to cast a very distinctive and encouraging future for the members of CSIC.The issue of “Phantom” consultants was addressed directly by Mr. Ryan. His message rang loud and clear to those who struggled through a long, divisive and expensive process to be able to use the designation CCIC after their name.However, it was not only the participation of almost 300 Practitioners who gained from this very positive and education experience. CAPIC grew up and is now the ONLY answer to who takes the role of The Canadian Bar Association in relationship to CSIC. It was a day that the outgoing President of CAPIC, Ron McKay, has reason to be very proud. He has led CAPIC from infancy through two stormy years and his captainship was steady and leaves us with a solid foundation for the future. Every Consultant owes him a deep debt of gratitude and thanks.The contributions made by so many were incredible but two people have to stand out as being exceptional for their abilities, hard work and determination. Phil Mooney, who was the excellent moderator of the day proved that he could have his own television series for his commanding presence. However, it was the hard work that he performed long before the NES opened that he is also in our gratitude for.The other was Alli Amani, President of CAPIC of Ontario and Host. Those of us who know Alli, understand that he spent his incredible strength in insuring that the 2nd Annual NES event was the best that could be offered In that, he succeeded.Many others contributed including Mario Bellissimo, long a friend of CAPIC and a distinguished lawyer, who introduced the Minster, The Honourable Mike Collee; Max Choudury, another friend of CAPIC and himself a distinguished lawyer, Mansour Motamedi, National Director of Education, presented a well received presentation on Support Tools; Camilla Jones on H and C; Gerd Damitz on Economic Class; Cobus Kriek and Katrina Onuschuck on HRSD; Monica O’Brien, Julie Brodyanski and Tarek Allam on Post Impressions; Keith Frank on Citizenship,; Sol Grombinsky and Eric Katz on The Canada Border Services Agency; and Farzad Farahmand on Nova Scotia PNP.The distinguished speakers included Malcolm Brown, the Assistant Deputy Minister, Ms. Ann Arnott, Director General of the International Region, Ms. Heidi Smith, Director of Economic Policy and Programs for Immigration, Pat Retsinas, Senior Policy and Program Advisor; James Sutherland, Director HRSDC; Bruce Scoffield, Director, International Region; Randy Orr, Director of Operations at Buffalo, New York; Karen Clarke, Policy Manager; George Bowles, Admissibility Branch and, finally, Elizabeth Mills, MPA of Nova Scotia and head of The Nova Scotia Office of Immigration.What a Cast!!! Thanks to the many others who are not mentioned and to the Staff of CAPIC including Executive Director, Berto Volpentesta, and our secretary, Monica Poon. Finally, thanks to every member of CAPIC who made the NES possible by their membership in the organization. We are all winners on such a day.Bruce Perreault, B.A., LL.B.,K.H.S., CCICRetiring National Director of MembershipCAPIC
Monday, November 27, 2006
Sunday, November 19, 2006
CSIP Alerts to CSIC revoked members
ALERT to all 764 revoked members at CSIC as former transitional members
CSIP is asking you to send this letter to CSIC legal department immediately to reserve your rights and clean your name from any further defamation to your profession..
Cut and paste the letter written below and use your full name and address on the letter head and send it to CSIC.
Canadian Society of Immigration Consultants390 Bay Street, Suite 1600Munich Re CenterToronto, Ontario Canada M5H 2Y2Via Fax: 416-572-4114or Via Email: information@csic-scci.ca
Dear, CSIC Chair and Board of Directors of CSIC
This is my warning letter to CSIC in respect of gravely defamatory statements published by you and your directors against my name as an immigration consultant, to the public dated November 18th, 2006 at this link
https://www.csic-scci.ca/eIS_Reports/Clients/CSIC/ExtranetWebForms/CSICMembershipList.aspx?lang=E&Rpt=RevokedMemberList
.
The published revoked membership list makes the libellous and false allegations that I as former transitional member have failed the membership exam and I am no longer valid member of good standing which is “threatening and harassing to my profession”, that you have made “unfounded allegations” and generally asserts that I have engaged in unauthorized conduct in respect of representing my clients before the CIC. The obvious message or innuendo to the public in this posting is that I am is irresponsible consultant, dangerous, and unethical and unauthorized and that the Public (prospective CIC clients) should not deal with me to represent them in any form of representation. Quite apart from the legal presumption in the law of defamation that these postings and statement and innuendos are false, I advised you CSIC and the CIC that they are utterly untrue in fact.
By taking the remarkable step of communicating these allegations to the public locally, nationally, and internationally in the midst of representing my clients to the CIC for immigration under presentation for the past five years , you and your Board of Directors have caused me incalculable damage to my profession and my immigration business. I expect you are aware of the financial magnitude of the 764 names on this posting, which could well put ours and our client’s damages from the defamation into the hundred of millions of dollars against your society.
You and your Board of Directors have repeatedly advised us that you were planning to cause damage to me and my other colleagues and our participation in presenting clients without CSIC membership, raising the distinct smell of malice.
The only apparent reason or motive for communicating these outrageous allegations and false advertising to the public can be to destroy our immigration business, our profession and the CIC client’s reputation and take advantage for personal profit of any opening that creates for your new inexperienced members. I understand CSIC is continuing to spread lies about my immigration profession in your communication with CIC and advertise false information connected to my name as former CSIC member on your website.
I demand an immediate retraction by removing my name of the revoked membership list and apology, the terms of which must be approved by me and my other 763 revoked members in advance to avoid making matters worse. The post revoked member list has set in motion a series of communications to the public destroying my reputation, and I expect you and your board of members to act promptly in stopping that process before it becomes worse. Failure to do so will be seen as a conscious decision to allow that defamation to spread and cause further damage to CSIC.
It goes without saying that any repetition or further communication by letter to CIC or advertising using CSIC website, email, personal discussion or otherwise of these or other negative allegations against me or my other 763 colleagues will be regarded as a malicious aggravation of damages.
We 764 revoked members reserve the right to bring this letter to the attention of any court dealing with this matter shortly.
Sincerely yours
____________________________(Write your name)
_________________________________ sign it and send it to CSIC immediately by fax, email, or mail, send a copy to CSIP
----- Original Message -----
From: <canvisa@bellnet.ca>
To: "Salloum Company" <salloumcompany@shaw.ca>
Cc: <canglobal@hotmail.com>; <roy77@mail.com>
Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2006 6:10 AM
Subject: Another Law Suit!
Not another Law suit!!! What gets me is that CSIC does not tell its Full Members how many Law suits the society is facing. I know that CSIC has been involved in the following litigation;1. CSIC fought and got intervener status against IAIP and CIC suit,2. CSIC fought and got intervener status against Chinese Chamber of Commerce and CIC,3. CSIC sued CSIP for an interpretation that someone at CSIC wanted silenced,4. The Law Societies of Canada and the Law Society of Upper Canada is heading to the courts this December 2006 over a lack of Consumer Protection and no fundamental justice over CSIC By-Law 13.Do you know of any more Law Suits? I have given up asking questions of persons at CSIC.Anything we do with our five senses we interpret. I have stated before that it clearly appears that the George W. Bush mentality is running CSIC. I just do not understand why.. How come so many people think that CSIC and its board of directors are in the wrong?. Was Donald Rumsfeld correct when he thought he was winning the war in Iraq?. Which members authorized CSIC to get involved in litigation without being sued themselves?. How can CSIC interpret IP9 that everyone has to be an authorized representative to receive payment for advice when the IRB, CIC and CBSA interpret the same regulations that representation for a fee is allowed as long as the Immigration Consultant gets paid upfront?. Why does CSIC think they can control the actions of former members with the by-laws after CSIC themselves revokes their status?. Showing so many revoked members in the same area of main PUBLIC home page with so few as Intent To Resign Members makes the society open to ridicule by the public, does it not?. Why does CSIC CPD committee ask for persons or organizations to be a provider and then put on the form "PROPOSED FEE"?. Why does CSIC board of directors believe that the pockets of members are so full that they will continue to pay?. Did CSIC not learn anything from the last election in the states or would they like Donald Rumsfeld phone number?. Why are there seven quick links on the CSIC home page regarding Complaints Process and Rules of Professional Conduct and not one item regarding increasing public confidence in services if they are both key principles of CSIC?. How did the board of CSIC amend the requirements to obtain full membership (give me the money) after the transition date without taking the resolution to the full members as per the by-laws?The American Public voted recently and changed the structure of both houses. Will full members do the same? I doubt it!!! I have had three brand new full members of CSIC ask to work with me this week so that they could participate in Appeals, Refugee Hearing, ADR's Detention Reviews etc. None of these full members have ever presented a case nor have they ever submitted a H&C application to CIC yet their full members. None have put together a package of submissions for an appeal or virtually anything else other then getting students abroad which is NOT covered by the regulations.YET there are at least 110 consultants who paid $530.00 to write the tests again.What is an experienced consultant definition according to CSIC board of directors? . Would an Immigration Consultant who has been very successful at hearings and appeals for more then a decade be considered an experienced consultant?. Would an Immigration Consultant who has been very successful at all areas of overseas Immigration including bringing several Investors to Canada in the last decade an experienced consultant?NO!IS THERE SOMETHING WRONG WITH THE CSIC BOARD OF DIRECTORS INTERPRETATION OF CERTAIN MATTERS?YOU DECIDE!
Roy Kellogg
CSIP is asking you to send this letter to CSIC legal department immediately to reserve your rights and clean your name from any further defamation to your profession..
Cut and paste the letter written below and use your full name and address on the letter head and send it to CSIC.
Canadian Society of Immigration Consultants390 Bay Street, Suite 1600Munich Re CenterToronto, Ontario Canada M5H 2Y2Via Fax: 416-572-4114or Via Email: information@csic-scci.ca
Dear, CSIC Chair and Board of Directors of CSIC
This is my warning letter to CSIC in respect of gravely defamatory statements published by you and your directors against my name as an immigration consultant, to the public dated November 18th, 2006 at this link
https://www.csic-scci.ca/eIS_Reports/Clients/CSIC/ExtranetWebForms/CSICMembershipList.aspx?lang=E&Rpt=RevokedMemberList
.
The published revoked membership list makes the libellous and false allegations that I as former transitional member have failed the membership exam and I am no longer valid member of good standing which is “threatening and harassing to my profession”, that you have made “unfounded allegations” and generally asserts that I have engaged in unauthorized conduct in respect of representing my clients before the CIC. The obvious message or innuendo to the public in this posting is that I am is irresponsible consultant, dangerous, and unethical and unauthorized and that the Public (prospective CIC clients) should not deal with me to represent them in any form of representation. Quite apart from the legal presumption in the law of defamation that these postings and statement and innuendos are false, I advised you CSIC and the CIC that they are utterly untrue in fact.
By taking the remarkable step of communicating these allegations to the public locally, nationally, and internationally in the midst of representing my clients to the CIC for immigration under presentation for the past five years , you and your Board of Directors have caused me incalculable damage to my profession and my immigration business. I expect you are aware of the financial magnitude of the 764 names on this posting, which could well put ours and our client’s damages from the defamation into the hundred of millions of dollars against your society.
You and your Board of Directors have repeatedly advised us that you were planning to cause damage to me and my other colleagues and our participation in presenting clients without CSIC membership, raising the distinct smell of malice.
The only apparent reason or motive for communicating these outrageous allegations and false advertising to the public can be to destroy our immigration business, our profession and the CIC client’s reputation and take advantage for personal profit of any opening that creates for your new inexperienced members. I understand CSIC is continuing to spread lies about my immigration profession in your communication with CIC and advertise false information connected to my name as former CSIC member on your website.
I demand an immediate retraction by removing my name of the revoked membership list and apology, the terms of which must be approved by me and my other 763 revoked members in advance to avoid making matters worse. The post revoked member list has set in motion a series of communications to the public destroying my reputation, and I expect you and your board of members to act promptly in stopping that process before it becomes worse. Failure to do so will be seen as a conscious decision to allow that defamation to spread and cause further damage to CSIC.
It goes without saying that any repetition or further communication by letter to CIC or advertising using CSIC website, email, personal discussion or otherwise of these or other negative allegations against me or my other 763 colleagues will be regarded as a malicious aggravation of damages.
We 764 revoked members reserve the right to bring this letter to the attention of any court dealing with this matter shortly.
Sincerely yours
____________________________(Write your name)
_________________________________ sign it and send it to CSIC immediately by fax, email, or mail, send a copy to CSIP
----- Original Message -----
From: <canvisa@bellnet.ca>
To: "Salloum Company" <salloumcompany@shaw.ca>
Cc: <canglobal@hotmail.com>; <roy77@mail.com>
Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2006 6:10 AM
Subject: Another Law Suit!
Not another Law suit!!! What gets me is that CSIC does not tell its Full Members how many Law suits the society is facing. I know that CSIC has been involved in the following litigation;1. CSIC fought and got intervener status against IAIP and CIC suit,2. CSIC fought and got intervener status against Chinese Chamber of Commerce and CIC,3. CSIC sued CSIP for an interpretation that someone at CSIC wanted silenced,4. The Law Societies of Canada and the Law Society of Upper Canada is heading to the courts this December 2006 over a lack of Consumer Protection and no fundamental justice over CSIC By-Law 13.Do you know of any more Law Suits? I have given up asking questions of persons at CSIC.Anything we do with our five senses we interpret. I have stated before that it clearly appears that the George W. Bush mentality is running CSIC. I just do not understand why.. How come so many people think that CSIC and its board of directors are in the wrong?. Was Donald Rumsfeld correct when he thought he was winning the war in Iraq?. Which members authorized CSIC to get involved in litigation without being sued themselves?. How can CSIC interpret IP9 that everyone has to be an authorized representative to receive payment for advice when the IRB, CIC and CBSA interpret the same regulations that representation for a fee is allowed as long as the Immigration Consultant gets paid upfront?. Why does CSIC think they can control the actions of former members with the by-laws after CSIC themselves revokes their status?. Showing so many revoked members in the same area of main PUBLIC home page with so few as Intent To Resign Members makes the society open to ridicule by the public, does it not?. Why does CSIC CPD committee ask for persons or organizations to be a provider and then put on the form "PROPOSED FEE"?. Why does CSIC board of directors believe that the pockets of members are so full that they will continue to pay?. Did CSIC not learn anything from the last election in the states or would they like Donald Rumsfeld phone number?. Why are there seven quick links on the CSIC home page regarding Complaints Process and Rules of Professional Conduct and not one item regarding increasing public confidence in services if they are both key principles of CSIC?. How did the board of CSIC amend the requirements to obtain full membership (give me the money) after the transition date without taking the resolution to the full members as per the by-laws?The American Public voted recently and changed the structure of both houses. Will full members do the same? I doubt it!!! I have had three brand new full members of CSIC ask to work with me this week so that they could participate in Appeals, Refugee Hearing, ADR's Detention Reviews etc. None of these full members have ever presented a case nor have they ever submitted a H&C application to CIC yet their full members. None have put together a package of submissions for an appeal or virtually anything else other then getting students abroad which is NOT covered by the regulations.YET there are at least 110 consultants who paid $530.00 to write the tests again.What is an experienced consultant definition according to CSIC board of directors? . Would an Immigration Consultant who has been very successful at hearings and appeals for more then a decade be considered an experienced consultant?. Would an Immigration Consultant who has been very successful at all areas of overseas Immigration including bringing several Investors to Canada in the last decade an experienced consultant?NO!IS THERE SOMETHING WRONG WITH THE CSIC BOARD OF DIRECTORS INTERPRETATION OF CERTAIN MATTERS?YOU DECIDE!
Roy Kellogg
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
