PR card renewal obligations

[mj4ever]

Hello,

I sponsored my mother to be a permanent resident back in 2018. The process was ongoing and she had a residency on march 4th 2021 while she was here. Because of covid delays, she received her PR card on february 7th 2022 with an expiry date of feb 7th 2027.

1- when could she apply to renew her card. Is it 9 months earlier than march 4th 2026 (5 years after the date of residency confirmation) or feb 7th 2027 (PR card expiry date)
2- is it possible apply for the PR card renewal earlier than the 9 months before expiry or she could have her request refused even if she fulfills the 730 days presence?
3- does she need to be in canada to apply for the renewal even when applying online.
4- if she needs to be in canada when applying for PR card renewal, could she travel during processing and use her current PR card to enter Canada or she has to wait until she receives her new card to travel again?
5- my mother is 70 years old and when she comes to canada she always stays with me and i fulfill all her needs so she doesn't have any of the required documents to prove her presence like a statement of work or rental contract or memberships. What should she do to prove that she was in canada for at least 730 days.

Thank you in advance for your help.

 

[steaky]

4) Yes, she needs to be in Canada when apply for PR card renewal (paper or online). She can travel during the processing.
5) How about Notice of Assessment and Health records?

 

[mj4ever]

4) Yes, she needs to be in Canada when apply for PR card renewal (paper or online). She can travel during the processing.
5) How about Notice of Assessment and Health records?

Thank you for your answer. For the health records i don't know what does that mean. She only went to the doctor twice in 5 years. We live in quebec and i don't know how to get a proof of these visits.

For the NOA, does she need to submit the ones of all the 5 years or 3 are sufficient ?

Thank you

 

[scylla]

Hello,

I sponsored my mother to be a permanent resident back in 2018. The process was ongoing and she had a residency on march 4th 2021 while she was here. Because of covid delays, she received her PR card on february 7th 2022 with an expiry date of feb 7th 2027.

1- when could she apply to renew her card. Is it 9 months earlier than march 4th 2026 (5 years after the date of residency confirmation) or feb 7th 2027 (PR card expiry date)
2- is it possible apply for the PR card renewal earlier than the 9 months before expiry or she could have her request refused even if she fulfills the 730 days presence?
3- does she need to be in canada to apply for the renewal even when applying online.
4- if she needs to be in canada when applying for PR card renewal, could she travel during processing and use her current PR card to enter Canada or she has to wait until she receives her new card to travel again?
5- my mother is 70 years old and when she comes to canada she always stays with me and i fulfill all her needs so she doesn't have any of the required documents to prove her presence like a statement of work or rental contract or memberships. What should she do to prove that she was in canada for at least 730 days.

Thank you in advance for your help.

1. 9 months before PR card expiry.
2. Not possible. Application will be returned
3. Must be in Canada
4. Can travel during processing and re-enter with her old card.
5. She must have filed taxes. Does she have a cell number? Did she use any health care services?

 

[mj4ever]

1. 9 months before PR card expiry.
2. Not possible. Application will be returned
3. Must be in Canada
4. Can travel during processing and re-enter with her old card.
5. She must have filed taxes. Does she have a cell number? Did she use any health care services?

Hi and thank you for your answer.

Yes she filed taxes on 2021,20211 and 2024. Would the NOA of these years be sufficient. She also has a cell number but it's only paid when she's in canada and not since 2021. Do i have to provide invoices of all the 5 years or only the months she's here would be enough. She also used health care services but only twice and I don't know how to get proof of that. My point is that there some things that could be provided but not to cover all the 730 days.

Thanks

 

[steaky]

Hi and thank you for your answer.

Yes she filed taxes on 2021,20211 and 2024. Would the NOA of these years be sufficient. She also has a cell number but it's only paid when she's in canada and not since 2021. Do i have to provide invoices of all the 5 years or only the months she's here would be enough. She also used health care services but only twice and I don't know how to get proof of that. My point is that there some things that could be provided but not to cover all the 730 days.

Thanks

She needs to provide two proofs. Give them two (NOA 2024 and one of those invoices dated within the preceding 5 years she signed the renewal application). Couldn't she ask the doctor's office to get the medical records?

 

[mabrahao]

Hey folks! I’m in the same situation—I need to renew my wife’s PR. Her cellphone bill is under my name, so I can’t use that as proof. She only worked for about a year, but I’ve been filing her taxes for the past seven years (since we moved here). Do I need to provide all of her NOAs for the past five years, or is just the most recent one enough?

For the second piece of proof, she’s been seeing a doctor at least once every three months. Should I request her records directly from the doctor, or can I get them through the Saskatchewan Health Authority website?

Thanks a lot!

 

[abff08f4813c]

Hey folks! I’m in the same situation—I need to renew my wife’s PR. Her cellphone bill is under my name, so I can’t use that as proof. She only worked for about a year, but I’ve been filing her taxes for the past seven years (since we moved here). Do I need to provide all of her NOAs for the past five years, or is just the most recent one enough?

I'd provide all, I think the idea is to cover as many days of that five year period as possible, so the more NOAs you have the better. (In the earlier post, only one NOA, the most recent one, was within the past five year period, hence why that advice was given I think.)

For the second piece of proof, she’s been seeing a doctor at least once every three months. Should I request her records directly from the doctor, or can I get them through the Saskatchewan Health Authority website?

Thanks a lot!

I'd think your doctor could get these faster (they probably have a copy in their office somewhere). No harm in asking both and seeing who can deliver first, I suppose.

 

[mabrahao]

I'd provide all, I think the idea is to cover as many days of that five year period as possible, so the more NOAs you have the better. (In the earlier post, only one NOA, the most recent one, was within the past five year period, hence why that advice was given I think.)


I'd think your doctor could get these faster (they probably have a copy in their office somewhere). No harm in asking both and seeing who can deliver first, I suppose.

Thanks! I've submitted her application 12 days ago, I added 2 lease agreements and 3 NOAs. Lets see if that will be enough... hahaha If they ask for more proof, I'll definitely ask her doctor.

 

[armoured]

I'd provide all, I think the idea is to cover as many days of that five year period as possible, so the more NOAs you have the better. (In the earlier post, only one NOA, the most recent one, was within the past five year period, hence why that advice was given I think.)

No. They ask for two pieces of evidence - provide two pieces of evidence. Don't provide a thick book - provide what they ask for. The idea is NOT to provide accounting for as many days as possible - the idea is to provide truthful, credible information in the form, and some basic evidence of presence (two pieces). If one really must, providing an extra piece of evidence or two MIGHT be useful - but probably not, and probably only in exceptional cases.

They have access to entry/exit records and CRA info as well. They can use the internet. And they can ask the applicant to provide more IF AND WHEN they think they need it.

Yes, providing too much info CAN cause delays.

Or as one member likes to put it: read the instructions. Follow the instructions. If in doubt - follow the instructions.

 

[armoured]

Thanks! I've submitted her application 12 days ago, I added 2 lease agreements and 3 NOAs. Lets see if that will be enough... hahaha If they ask for more proof, I'll definitely ask her doctor.

For the record, while more than strictly required, that's probably within a reasonable amount of information to provide. Frankly the two lease agreements or two NOAs or one of each would probably have been fine, too.

Providing more than those FIVE pieces of evidence - three more than what they asked for - would be ridiculous (without some exceptional circumstances).

 

[abff08f4813c]

Thanks! I've submitted her application 12 days ago, I added 2 lease agreements and 3 NOAs. Lets see if that will be enough... hahaha If they ask for more proof, I'll definitely ask her doctor.

That sounds like it'd cover enough of the time period. Should be good.

The idea is NOT to provide accounting for as many days as possible

Doh! Of course it's not required to account for every single day in the five year period - even if you were in Canada the entire time of those five years, it's only 730 days required, so proof that supports that is enough.

Nearly all lease agreements I've seen in Canada cover a full calendar year (and the exceptions cover longer periods of time). Likewise an NOA is for the period of an entire tax year. So this likewise supports the belief that the evidence would cover 730 days.

For the record, while more than strictly required, that's probably within a reasonable amount of information to provide. Frankly the two lease agreements or two NOAs or one of each would probably have been fine, too.

This also conveniently fits with my understanding above - as that'd cover the roughly two years.

And they can ask the applicant to provide more IF AND WHEN they think they need it.

I guess my concern here is, if they do end up asking, that this would introduce delays. (Or rather, by its very nature, be a delay.)

Don't provide a thick book - provide what they ask for.
the idea is to provide truthful, credible information in the form, and some basic evidence of presence (two pieces).

This wouldn't apply to an NOA or a regular lease agreement but if the proof is weaker - say a cell phone bill covering the charges in one month only, and another form from the doctor's office outlining when one visited as a patient for treatment (that covered say a few weeks until the illness was cured and a full recovery happened), my worry was, would that be enough?

They have access to entry/exit records and CRA info as well.

This is a good point, your right. I'd think that this would be enough to cover it. (In fact, now that I think of it, if one didn't have a lease, asking CBSA for a copy of entry/exit records and submitting that might work as the 2nd proof after the NOA.) Even if the records are incomplete and missing a few bits here and there, likely it'd clearly show enough of the days clearly. Consider my worry cured.

Providing more than those FIVE pieces of evidence - three more than what they asked for - would be ridiculous (without some exceptional circumstances).

Continuing with the CBSA entry/exit records example, agreed that there'd be some exceptional circumstances, of course - say because a person did in fact leave Canada for long periods so that the one or two missing records actually makes a really big difference. But yeah, if we set aside the cases with exceptional circumstances, then we're in agreement.

Yes, providing too much info CAN cause delays.

Agreed. If nothing else, someone still has to sit through and sift through all that paperwork, so if it's too time consuming, that's already a delay right there. And then maybe in one of the extra forms sent over, an officer decided that something needs to be verified, so another delay. The more that needs to be verified, the longer it takes overall.

Of course, if you have to (say because you have exceptional circumstances), then it is what it is. But presumably this wouldn't apply to most - including the latest OP - and it's better to not overvolunteer here.

They can use the internet.

This was the only bit I didn't get. I mean, it's true.. but it seems like a non sequitur. How would an IRCC officer's ability to use the internet help an applicant's PR card renewal application? Edit: I'm sure you're right and this is just a case of me not understanding something, perhaps something rather simple. (It's a bit too late in the night right now..)

 

[armoured]

Doh! Of course it's not required to account for every single day in the five year period - even if you were in Canada the entire time of those five years, it's only 730 days required, so proof that supports that is enough.

No. They do NOT ask you to provide accounting for every single day of physical presence. They just ask for two pieces of evidence that you were in Canada - at all.

Nearly all lease agreements I've seen in Canada cover a full calendar year (and the exceptions cover longer periods of time). Likewise an NOA is for the period of an entire tax year. So this likewise supports the belief that the evidence would cover 730 days.

Again, not needed to cover every single day (and of course a lease on its own does not 'prove' one was in Canada all that time.

I guess my concern here is, if they do end up asking, that this would introduce delays. (Or rather, by its very nature, be a delay.)

And yet - they do not ask for additional information for the vast majority of cases. Those in compliance (at least with a bit of buffer) get the renewals processed quite quickly. THere does not appear to be ANY connection to how extensive the evidence presented is.

The correlation is simply: those clearly in compliance with the requirement, and with no serious oddities or issues with compliance in the past, get it approved quickly.

This wouldn't apply to an NOA or a regular lease agreement but if the proof is weaker - say a cell phone bill covering the charges in one month only, and another form from the doctor's office outlining when one visited as a patient for treatment (that covered say a few weeks until the illness was cured and a full recovery happened), my worry was, would that be enough?

We don't have a lot of details - but it's pretty clear that for those that have things from the suggested list of evidence (leases, NOAs, etc) - and everyone who has worked or resided in Canada should have at least NOAs - don't generally have any trouble. (Kids perhaps being the exception)

Agreed. If nothing else, someone still has to sit through and sift through all that paperwork, so if it's too time consuming, that's already a delay right there. And then maybe in one of the extra forms sent over, an officer decided that something needs to be verified, so another delay. The more that needs to be verified, the longer it takes overall.

This is my point. It is NOT a good idea for IRCC to provide many times what is needed. If your file is so bad you need 250+ pages, you have a credibility problem.

This was the only bit I didn't get. I mean, it's true.. but it seems like a non sequitur. How would an IRCC officer's ability to use the internet help an applicant's PR card renewal application? Edit: I'm sure you're right and this is just a case of me not understanding something, perhaps something rather simple. (It's a bit too late in the night right now..)

I mean, this should be pretty obvious. If they go onto 'the socials' and see that the person is attending school abroad during a period they claim to be working full-time in Canada, it's going to raise questions - partly about their time in Canada, but mostly about whether the person's attestations can be trusted. If they instead see the usual innocuous stuff and references to their day to day life and pictures from Newfoundland, it's going to support their case.

 

[abff08f4813c]

We don't have a lot of details - but it's pretty clear that for those that have things from the suggested list of evidence (leases, NOAs, etc) - and everyone who has worked or resided in Canada should have at least NOAs - don't generally have any trouble.

Interesting. Basically it sounds like most of the time the two pieces of evidence is a formality and they'd generally know from internal government sources. (I wonder why require evidence at all then with the application? Perhaps they just want the applicant to honestly say "Yes, I was in Canada" and prevent a "I checked the wrong box / didn't read the instructions" situation from happening? It'd be much harder to believe that a person misread "Yes, I was in Canada" as "No, I wasn't in Canada" if they include supporting docs to affirm the statement, I guess.)

(Kids perhaps being the exception)

Now I'm wondering why. Kids wouldn't have NOAs but presumably would still have entry/exit records. And normally one would have things like records of enrollment from schools and proof of doctor's office visits (even if a kid is never sick, they'd still have to get vaccinated to attend school) to submit as evidence.

I mean, this should be pretty obvious. If they go onto 'the socials' and see that the person is attending school abroad during a period they claim to be working full-time in Canada, it's going to raise questions - partly about their time in Canada, but mostly about whether the person's attestations can be trusted. If they instead see the usual innocuous stuff and references to their day to day life and pictures from Newfoundland, it's going to support their case.

Ahh, got it. Makes sense now.

To state the obvious, this doesn't always work. My own personal case is one. I have a super common name, and you can find folks with my name all around the world. Meanwhile, I deliberately keep a low profile online and and avoid social media owned by the big companies etc. So someone trying this on me would have to work really hard to filter out a bunch of false positives/false matches only to come up empty in the end. But I'm perhaps unusual in this regard.

If your file is so bad you need 250+ pages, you have a credibility problem.

So on the one hand, I'm not sure that there's necessarily a correlation between the number of total pages in supporting documents and views on a person's credibility. Someone who skipped out on almost five years but then forges a pair of fake leases and submits them as the two pieces of evidence wouldn't have more than the usual number of pages, but would be clearly and easily caught lying.

On the other hand, I can think of some contrived exceptional cases where many proofs are required but the applicant is entirely honest and forthcoming. (For example, someone who had the misfortune to be kidnapped and smuggled out of Canada against their will - bypassing the usual entry/exit controls - repeatedly.)

This is my point. It is NOT a good idea for IRCC to provide many times what is needed.

But on the other hand, we do agree on this. You've changed my view - now I see that if one has such a complicated case that many proofs are required anyways, expect many long delays regardless - so the first delay to ask for more evidence likely becomes inconsequential in comparison to the rest.

 

[armoured]

Re: kids. My point was that the docs suggested to submit (eg Noa, lease, job records) mostly wouldn't apply. They would have others such as school records if of age and doctors visits etc, but also may lack things like drivers licenses and other photo ID and bank accounts.