Moving Spouse after BMQ - Kingston Thread

[beach_bum]

Are you a clerk now?  Don't tell him that the paperwork is not necessary.  Perhaps in your case it was over looked, but as a clerk I know that I ask for it, as do the other clerks I know.  It is the policy to ask for proof.

 

[Springroll]

Are you a clerk now?   Don't tell him that the paperwork is not necessary.   Perhaps in your case it was over looked, but as a clerk I know that I ask for it, as do the other clerks I know.   It is the policy to ask for proof.

Well then I guess it is time to retrain all the clerks on both coasts because I know of alot of others that have never had to submit proof, and only had to submit the signed common law doc's.

 

[beach_bum]

You are missing the point.  You are advising someone of something that is against the policy.  Just because you know of a couple of people who had things happen, doesn't mean he won't be asked.  They didn't follow policy, but I can guarantee you, the majority of clerks DO follow the policy.

 

[Springroll]

You are missing the point.   You are advising someone of something that is against the policy.   Just because you know of a couple of people who had things happen, doesn't mean he won't be asked.   They didn't follow policy, but I can guarantee you, the majority of clerks DO follow the policy.

re-read what I wrote...better yet, here ya go:

The documentation is not that necessary. They will give you a common law form to fill out where you and the GF would have to sign stating that you have lived together for a year. It is a legal form, so do not enter into it lightly.

In 1998 when we signed ours, they did not require any documentation as proof of us residing together. Even recently for a friend of mine, they did not ask for any either. Just keep in mind that once you sign that paper, she will be entitled to half of everything of yours, no different than getting married.

 

[beach_bum]

The documentation is not that necessary.

I read what you wrote.  I am not saying that your point on not taking common-law lightly was wrong.  You are right on that point.  It's the statement above where you are WAY off base.  Until you are in a position to change our policies, you CAN NOT say what is or isn't necessary. 

 

[Springroll]

I read what you wrote.   I am not saying that your point on not taking common-law lightly was wrong.   You are right on that point.   It's the statement above where you are WAY off base.   Until you are in a position to change our policies, you CAN NOT say what is or isn't necessary.  

I was going by what has be proven time and time again with the clerks that not only my husband and I have dealt with, but with clerks that friends of ours have dealt with.

If I recall correctly, the Common Law form that people have to sign is more of an affidavit, right?

 

[beach_bum]

Okay.  Listen up!  I am a clerk and have been for 12 years now.  I also spent several years working in recruiting.  During that time, I can assure you that I and all the clerks that I worked with have asked for proof that the couple in question have lived together for a year.  Just because you can give examples of people doing things wrong, it does NOT make you an expert on ANYTHING.  Can I make it any more simple for you or do I need to draw you a picture!?!

 

[Springroll]

a picture would be nice....hehehe just kidding.

I know what you are saying, trust me. I am just goign by the umpteen clerks that my husband or friends of ours have dealt with. Some clerks take their job seriously and ask for everything, many are not that way. You should also keep in mind that the person who asked the question is not a child and I am pretty sure that by 27, he knows how to do things, such as geting proof.

There is nothing, other than having a rental lease together, that can prove that some people truly are common law. The Common law form that is given to people(at least in 1998) to sign is an affidavit stating that yes you have either A) lived togther for a year, B)have a child together, or C)residing together to the point where you consider the other person your spouse.

My hubby said he will check a copy of it out tomorrow to see if it is wrong.

 

[George Wallace]

OK

You are 2 and 0.

Time to go to your corners.

 

[Michael OLeary]

I know this is locked for a time-out, but I am going to add these comments for consideration anyway.

The criteria for recognition of common-law relationships by the CF are defined at CFAO 19-41.

CFAO 19-41 -- COMMON-LAW RELATIONSHIPS
http://www.admfincs.forces.gc.ca/admfincs/subjects/cfao/019-41_e.asp

While specific documentary requirements are not identified, there is a very clear requirement to establish that the applying member and the alleged common-law spouse  "have resided together as husband and wife continuously for at least one year immediately preceding the application or, if a child has been born to them, are residing together as husband and wife with the child".

Consider, for example, a service member who has been with a unit for years, who is known to his or her supervisor, whose living arrangements have been declared in personnel interviews and detailed in supervisor's staff notes, whose co-habiting partner may well be known by the supervisor. This individual has a chain of command that can vouch for the validity of their claim (see Annex A at Ref) when presented to an officer for completion of the Statutory Declaration (see Annex C at Ref).

Now, imagine a new recruit asking about common-law relationships and possible entitlements. Entitlements that could be very costly to the system when you are talking about moving spouse/family, move of  F&E, and PMQ entitlements, etc. The recruit has no chain of command at the time, has no-one in the system that knows their situation, or that could possible vouch for them from within the CF.

In the latter case, a clerk at the CFRC must still take that member and his/her Statutory Declaration to one of the officers for signing. Now, there still remains a requirement to certify that the requirements of the "Stat Dec" have been met.

In order to do their job, that clerk MUST ask for documentary proof of the individual's living arrangements to establish that the year of cohabitation requirement has been met.

All this to say that the example of a serving member includes factors other than the sterile demand for "proof" and does not necessarily represent a sound example for a recruit's inquiries - what can be done within unit lines is often very different than the handling of a new recruit in a formal by-the-book fashion.

 

[Michael OLeary]

Unlocked for further input. To remain so only as long as participants remain rational and polite to one another.

 

[Fruss]

Springroll and beach_bum: Thanks for your input. I would be happy to hear what else you have to say REGARDING THE SUBJECT.

Anyone else has something to say?

Thanks guys

Frank

 

[spud]

Anyone else has something to say?

Frank

Many, many moons ago I was attending training, my children (was a single parent at the time) were home with my girlfriend. I explained my situation to my instructors and also got the base chief on side - small base.. They allowed me to live off base while in training as long as I maintained a bed space, same as everyone else. Was told by all involved to keep all receipts for my move, I had to pay the shot initially,  and ask for reimbursement after they were moved. I asked and they accomodated. After getting everything done they also allowed me to put my name on the PMQ list. Not long after that I got a PMQ.

Is it still the same? I don't know, each situation and location is probably different.  I am firmly convinced that things went my way because I was upfront, never kept anyone out of the loop, did as I was told, especially by the clerks because they are nose in the regs everyday and when they helped me at different stages I made sure to let them know I appreciated it. And I mean everybody, personally thanked the base chief on down.

just my $.02

potato

 

[zander1976]

Hello,

I have searched the forums and talk to the recruiters but I haven't an answer. I was wondering about my wife after I complete basic. Will my wife be able to joining me while I am in training in Kingston? How hard is it to get approved to have your wife moved and does anybody have any tips to make that process smoother? I was offered an ATIS position so I will be going to Kingston for x weeks for POET (doesn't say how many weeks on the website anymore) and then 20 weeks of job specific training.

The clerk at the recruiters office said that I will need to request permission to have my wife moved to Kingston. My wife is a civilian so she isn't locked to anywhere.  In fact, they said that during my training time, my wife shouldn't move at all or the military will not move me to my first posting. I understand the job I have selected will separate my wife but that seems over the top. She wants to move to Kingston now and start school. It's bad enough to say that I will be gone for a year but it's even worse when I say that you are stuck here too.

Does anybody know how hard is it to get approval to have her move? Can I pay for the move myself? If she isn't going to be moved until my first posting then can she move around and enjoy her free time?

Thank you,

 

[PuckChaser]

Postings to training are typically restricted, your wife won't be able to accompany you (on the CF's dime). You're also going to have to live in the barracks, and your roommates won't want to share bedspace.

 

[zander1976]

Thanks, is it possible to get off restriction?

 

[PuckChaser]

Thanks, is it possible to get off restriction?

No, restricted postings are for people in the training system. Imagine the cost of moving your family around if you enrolled in BC, moved to Kingston for training for a year, then to Cold Lake for your first posting. Cross country moves are in the tens of thousands of dollars of cost to the crown.

 

[SupersonicMax]

It depends what trade.  I finished school, was posted to Winnipeg for 9 months, Moose Jaw for 13 and Cold Lake for 19 months.  Short postings all during training.

 

[zander1976]

Thank you, the cost isn't a problem. I have no problem paying to get her to Kingston but then that causes other problems. Do people really go to training for a year+ and leave there family behind? I can understand that on tour but I am safely sitting in Canada and my wife isn't going to understand that.

 

[PuckChaser]

The length of POET is listed on the forums here somewhere, I believe its in the neighbourhood of 8 months. Then you have your ATIS QL3 course which is another couple months. SSM is a pilot and has a longer than most training cycle.

This being said, depending on how close your wife is to Kingston, you can maybe go home on weekends (if not confined to barracks), and you'll have block leave over Christmas. So it isn't 18 months without seeing your wife at all.