Question / Advice on re-entry w/o RO met

[walterg74]

Hi all,

To make it short, we shoud be getting in the country by Sep 5 to still meet our RO, as that will mark 3 years outside the country.

While that is what we were going to do, we will be having another baby in November, so it's not feasible to return at this time...

Being that we will be returning a couple of months after the RO will not be able to be met, I know there is a chance you get reported on entering, but I would like to ask, how likely is it to actually get reported, if you are entering with PR cards that are *NOT* expired..? (I think the expiration date on our is somewhere around 2020).

 

[Siryommyt]

Hello, I am new here, please how is it going here

 

[Siryommyt]

Hello, I am new here, please how is be

 

[walterg74]

Hello, I am new here, please how is it going here

What??

 

[walterg74]

Anyone?

 

[Bs65]

Hi all,

To make it short, we shoud be getting in the country by Sep 5 to still meet our RO, as that will mark 3 years outside the country.

While that is what we were going to do, we will be having another baby in November, so it's not feasible to return at this time...

Being that we will be returning a couple of months after the RO will not be able to be met, I know there is a chance you get reported on entering, but I would like to ask, how likely is it to actually get reported, if you are entering with PR cards that are *NOT* expired..? (I think the expiration date on our is somewhere around 2020).

There is no way really to know if you will get reported but having PR cards that are not expired is a good start and you probably know you will need to stay for 2 years without leaving to reset your RO. There never seems to be any statistics on people getting reported and often can just be down to how conciencious the officer is at the time or even how busy the line is. As PRs anyway you are entitled to enter the country again.

Arriving with a new baby might involve more scrutiny of course given you would need to apply for the childs PR after you land back not before. Not sure what minimum age is that airlines allow new borns to fly so you could overrun by a few months after November which could add to the scrutiny.

 

[Tubsmagee]

To make it short, we shoud be getting in the country by Sep 5 to still meet our RO, as that will mark 3 years outside the country.

While that is what we were going to do, we will be having another baby in November, so it's not feasible to return at this time...

Being that we will be returning a couple of months after the RO will not be able to be met, I know there is a chance you get reported on entering, but I would like to ask, how likely is it to actually get reported, if you are entering with PR cards that are *NOT* expired..? (I think the expiration date on our is somewhere around 2020).

How long were you in Canada after landing? I'd say better to not risk it, and go now. If you wait until after the baby is born, you are going to then need to wait for travel document of some type, and then sponsor the child. That is going to open you up to having RO determination potentially made. But then, having been out for here years, maybe consider whether Canada is really where you want to be.

 

[walterg74]

There is no way really to know if you will get reported but having PR cards that are not expired is a good start and you probably know you will need to stay for 2 years without leaving to reset your RO. There never seems to be any statistics on people getting reported and often can just be down to how conciencious the officer is at the time or even how busy the line is. As PRs anyway you are entitled to enter the country again.

Arriving with a new baby might involve more scrutiny of course given you would need to apply for the childs PR after you land back not before. Not sure what minimum age is that airlines allow new borns to fly so you could overrun by a few months after November which could add to the scrutiny.

Thanks for your repy. i actually found out that as long as there is no health issues, you can fly with a baby of even 2 days old! So that would not be a problem (although of course we plan on waiting at least a couple of weeks).

Another plan we are thinking about involves travelling on August 23rd. At this time, we would still be able to meet the RO (with 2 extra weeks to spare), and then leave 1 month before the due date (not having the baby woth our physician is out of the question, besides not having health insurance initially).
I think upon return it might make it easier to answer "when was the last time you were in Canada?" With "2/3 months ago" than woth "3 and a half years ago...". What do you think?

Another thing that worries me a little is sponsoring my firstborn. I hear I need to be in the country and I have seen processing times are long, however someone from the forum has told me in these cases (you can't just leave your baby alone home) that there is a way to speed up the process? I guess worst case if we will only be there 2 months and leave, I don't need to worry about it on the first visit and can just do it when we return for good 2 months after that, when we will be stauing definitely, that is if no issues happen on re-entry, unless of course this pops up on the sponsorship process -more than likely?- but trust thet the medical issue, possible effect on minor/dependant child is justification enou for the 45 or so days we would not be able to meet it by.

Thoughts?

Thanks!!!

 

[walterg74]

How long were you in Canada after landing? I'd say better to not risk it, and go now. If you wait until after the baby is born, you are going to then need to wait for travel document of some type, and then sponsor the child. That is going to open you up to having RO determination potentially made. But then, having been out for here years, maybe consider whether Canada is really where you want to be.

Hi thanks for answering. See my previous post for more info. We were in Canada for 9 days. I agree it might be better to go at least some time ahead (we can't go NOW) see previous post on reasoning.
I will need a travel document for my child anyway, since she is not PR, visitor visa or temporar resident permit, but not for me as my PR card doesn't expire until 2020, so no concern in that regard.
Have been out here for years but never really left, as we inly did the initial trip because otherwise out visa would expire, and we couldn't go after the first baby was born because it would be too soon.
One thing led to the other, etc but there is no point in discussing that now, just trying to determine the best course of action.

Thanks.

 

[canuck_in_uk]

Another thing that worries me a little is sponsoring my firstborn. I hear I need to be in the country and I have seen processing times are long, however someone from the forum has told me in these cases (you can't just leave your baby alone home) that there is a way to speed up the process? I guess worst case if we will only be there 2 months and leave, I don't need to worry about it on the first visit and can just do it when we return for good 2 months after that, when we will be stauing definitely, that is if no issues happen on re-entry, unless of course this pops up on the sponsorship process -more than likely?- but trust thet the medical issue, possible effect on minor/dependant child is justification enou for the 45 or so days we would not be able to meet it by.

You can't sponsor your child when you don't meet the RO. I don't know what you mean by "the medical issue" or "possible effect on minor/dependent child". It was entirely your choice to stay out of Canada and any effect on your child is your own responsibility. IRCC only makes exceptions for those with valid Humanitarian and Compassionate grounds, which you don't have.

You would need to spend 2 continuous years in Canada to once again meet the RO before you could apply to sponsor your child.

 

[walterg74]

You can't sponsor your child when you don't meet the RO. I don't know what you mean by "the medical issue" or "possible effect on minor/dependent child". It was entirely your choice to stay out of Canada and any effect on your child is your own responsibility. IRCC only makes exceptions for those with valid Humanitarian and Compassionate grounds, which you don't have.

You would need to spend 2 continuous years in Canada to once again meet the RO before you could apply to sponsor your child.

That's not exactly how it works (your statement on "your choice"..., maybe poor choice of words?)

Check post #5 in this thread: http://www.canadavisa.com/canada-immigration-discussion-board/threads/pr-with-less-than-2-years-of-residence-suggested-preparation-for-appeal.142215/

What I mean with the medical issue is that it means it can be justification for the appeal process should you get reported for not meeting the RO. Those are exactly wha H&C grounds means if you read about it a little. From section 28 of the IRPA (ommiting 1 & 2 to not mess up the post):

Residency Obligation
28. (1) A permanent resident must comply with a residency obligation with respect to every five-year period. Application
(2) The following provisions govern the residency obligation under subsection (1):

3. (c) a determination by an officer that humanitarian and compassionate considerations relating to a permanent resident, taking into account the best interests of a child directly affected by the determination, justify the retention of permanent resident status overcomes any breach of the residency obligation prior to the determination.
   

 

[canuck_in_uk]

That's not exactly how it works (your statement on "your choice"..., maybe poor choice of words?)

Check post #5 in this thread: http://www.canadavisa.com/canada-immigration-discussion-board/threads/pr-with-less-than-2-years-of-residence-suggested-preparation-for-appeal.142215/

What I mean with the medical issue is that it means it can be justification for the appeal process should you get reported for not meeting the RO. Those are exactly wha H&C grounds means if you read about it a little. From section 28 of the IRPA (ommiting 1 & 2 to not mess up the post):

Residency Obligation
28. (1) A permanent resident must comply with a residency obligation with respect to every five-year period. Application
(2) The following provisions govern the residency obligation under subsection (1):

1. (c) a determination by an officer that humanitarian and compassionate considerations relating to a permanent resident, taking into account the best interests of a child directly affected by the determination, justify the retention of permanent resident status overcomes any breach of the residency obligation prior to the determination.

Yes, that is how it works. Nothing you have said indicates that you were required by reasons outside of your control to remain out of Canada. You chose to live outside of Canada and therefore don't meet the RO. That is not H&C grounds.

I don't know why you are quoting that post when it doesn't even state what H&C grounds were used for that PR to retain their status.

Examples of valid H&C grounds: a PR remains in their country because a family member is dying and there is no other family to care for them or a PR is removed from Canada as a minor and returns as soon as they reach adulthood.

You are seriously misconstruing the "Best interests of the child" aspect. If it was a valid reason in your situation, then why didn't you move to Canada years ago? If your status is revoked and your family must return to your country, there is no separation from a parent still living in Canada, there is no risk of persecution/war/etc., no specific danger to the child.

 

[walterg74]

Yes, that is how it works. Nothing you have said indicates that you were required by reasons outside of your control to remain out of Canada. You chose to live outside of Canada and therefore don't meet the RO. That is not H&C grounds.

I don't know why you are quoting that post when it doesn't even state what H&C grounds were used for that PR to retain their status.

Examples of valid H&C grounds: a PR remains in their country because a family member is dying and there is no other family to care for them or a PR is removed from Canada as a minor and returns as soon as they reach adulthood.

You are seriously misconstruing the "Best interests of the child" aspect. If it was a valid reason in your situation, then why didn't you move to Canada years ago? If your status is revoked and your family must return to your country, there is no separation from a parent still living in Canada, there is no risk of persecution/war/etc., no specific danger to the child.

I don't think you actually read my post in it's entirety... at least not the relevant one for which the discussion continued which is #8. I said we would be going back to Canada BEFORE the RO time limit ends, so no problem with the first part, but would then need to leave for a short period to have the baby.

It is not feasible to have a baby with no health insurance or even on traveller's insurance (which of course we would buy). And I think it's very much in the best interest of a child to actually be born and alive...

 

[walterg74]

I don't know why you are quoting that post when it doesn't even state what H&C grounds were used for that PR to retain their status.

It doesn't matter, I simply quoted it because (as long as the grounds are admisible of course) it shows you could potentially sponsor your child without having met the RO if deemed admisible.

 

[dbss]

You are complicating your circumstances on your own. The best case scenario is that you come to Canada before Sept and give birth to your child in Canada. If you are thinking of applying under H&C, questions arises that if the VO is to agree with that, those circumstances only presented now - what happened before now? Your situation is not perfect hence outcomes are not going to be perfect.

Again, everyone is trying to be helpful so taking stabs in a non-civil manner is not going to help anyone. All the best.