Permanent Resident returning after 20 years away

[kevs]

First of all, is it even possible to keep status?

Consider the following situation: a couple immigrated to Canada in the early 80’s as permanent residents, and had 3 children, all born in Canada.

After about 10 years in Canada, the couple separates, and one of the parties moves back to her home country, to her parents, taking her 3 minors along.

In the meanwhile gets officially divorced, and then remarries in her home country, having another child.
Through the years, her 3 Canadian sons, all adults now, move back to Canada. And she separates from her partner.

When leaving Canada she never “declared” it was definite. Through all those years she has been to Canada 2/3 times, for short periods of time, as a tourist. She still has documents, such as the SIN.

As most of her close family is now in Canada, she would like to return. Clearly, she not met the residency requirements to keep the permanent residency status.

Did she lose status by not meeting those requirements, or by failing to renew her status somehow, or will she lose it by trying to reenter Canada as a permanent resident, and the immigration officer cancelling her status?

The question is: if she tries to return through the border, explaining her situation to immigration, would she have a chance her situation gets analyzed? And even though she does not meet the residency requirements by several years, could a favorable decision be made on compassionate grounds?

If they do let her in while analyzing her process, how long could it take for a decision to be made? Would she maintain permanent resident privileges in the meanwhile, as being able to work (she does have a SIN)?

I would appreciate any insight anybody may have in such a situation.
Thank you.

 

[zardoz]

Does she have a visa-exempt passport to allow her to travel to Canada?
If not, she will either have to apply for a Permanent Resident Travel Document, or slip through the land border with the USA.

If she can get to a Port of Entry, she may or may not be reported as failing to meet the Residency Obligation. (In her case, you haven't shown any good reason why she should be exempted.) There is due process and she would be allowed to enter, even if it's to process the appeal. She will NOT be bounced at the border as long as she can prove that she is a PR (landing papers etc). If they cannot identify her as a PR, that might be a different matter...

She remains a PR until it is formally revoked, so she could reactivate her SIN and work.

There is a huge amount of information on this subject in this section of the forum, so I suggest you do some research on the process.

You mention that she visited as a "tourist" in the past. I'm guessing, from this, that she is visa-exempt.

 

[Leon]

If she never officially lost her PR, she still has her PR status even though she doesn't meet the RO.

If she wants to force a decision on her PR status, she could apply for a PR travel document. The visa office will 99% deny and revoke her PR status for not meeting the RO for years. One of her sons could then sponsor her again. He will however have to prove that he has enough income to meet her expenses and if she goes on welfare or disability in Canada in the next 20 years, he will be on the hook to re-pay that to the government.

If she wants to slip in the back door so to speak, she should just visit one more time as a visitor. If it's worked in the past, I don't see why it wouldn't work again.

Her SIN will have been de-activated because she hasn't been working but she can get it re-activated again by going to Service Canada with her passport and landing papers. She can apply for a health card with her passport and landing papers as well. Getting a drivers license may be a problem because they often ask for a valid PR card as a proof of status. She can not apply for a PR card at this time. She should actually stay out of the radar of immigration completely and not leave Canada for at least 2 years. After 2 years, she will meet the RO again and can apply for a PR card. If she manages to stay for 2 years, they may only look at the past 5 years so they can not refuse and say that she lost her PR years ago.

 

[kevs]

Thank you for your replies.

She has a passport from a visa exempt country.

Say she tries to come back, and explains her situation to the airport immagration officer. Could he revoke her status on the spot, or would that require some time to get analyzed? Could she eventually appeal a negative decision. I am not sure how long all this can take.

And if they do revoke her status, and her sons sponsor her back (they can financially support her), would she be able to stay in Canada during that period? From what I read, wait time for parent sponorship are very long.

And I guess if her status is revoked, they will cancel her SIN as well, and will not be able to work?

Thanks for your insight.

 

[Leon]

Her options and possible results are the following.

1. She can apply for a PR Travel document. This will force the visa office to make a determination on her PR which will 99% be negative because you do not seem to indicate any good reason for her staying outside Canada other than her personal choice.

Result: She will lose her PR status. She can come to Canada as a visitor only. Will not have health care and may not work. One of her sons can sponsor her for PR again which will take some time.

2. She arrives in Canada and tries to explain her situation to an immigration officer. The immigration officer will decide to report her or not.

Result 1: Most likely, she will get reported. If she gets reported, she can appeal. However, without good grounds for not being able to meet the RO, she will lose the appeal. She will be allowed to stay in Canada during the appeal processing which can take 1-2 years. During that time, she is still a PR, will have health care and may work. When she loses the appeal, she will lose her PR status and be asked to leave. After that, she can come to Canada as a visitor only. Will not have health care and may not work. One of her sons can sponsor her for PR again which will take some time.

Result 2: On the off chance that the IO does not report her, it does not mean her sins are forgiven, just that the IO has for some reason decided to look the other way. Therefore, she would still have to stay under the radar for two years until she meets the RO again. Applying for anything from immigration during that time, such as a PR card, would cause an investigation on her PR status. She doesn't meet the RO for the past 5 years so she would likely get reported and lose her PR. If she stays under the radar for 2 years, she will meet the RO again and her PR status will be back in good stand and she can apply for a PR card.

3. She enters as a visitor like she's done for the past 2 or 3 times she came to visit. If she is not acting differently than the other times she came to visit and she is not carrying an abnormal amount of luggage, most likely she will just enter normally like any other visitor.

Result: Minimal risk of getting reported and she can now stay under the radar for 2 years until she meets the RO again.

Staying under the radar is not illegal. She is still a PR because her status was never revoked. She just doesn't have a PR card to prove it. She would be able to use her landing papers to re-activate her SIN as well as get a health card. Drivers license could pose a problem though. The PR card was designed as a travel document for PR's but due to function creep, it has in many cases become the most acceptable ID to prove your PR status. You can usually get by with landing papers though.

 

[txboyscout]

Thank you for your replies.

She has a passport from a visa exempt country.

Say she tries to come back, and explains her situation to the airport immagration officer. Could he revoke her status on the spot, or would that require some time to get analyzed? Could she eventually appeal a negative decision. I am not sure how long all this can take.

And if they do revoke her status, and her sons sponsor her back (they can financially support her), would she be able to stay in Canada during that period? From what I read, wait time for parent sponorship are very long.

And I guess if her status is revoked, they will cancel her SIN as well, and will not be able to work?

Thanks for your insight.

If she has a visa exempt passport, she should just come as a visitor without saying anything stay for 2 full years and then apply to have her PR card renewed

 

[Alurra71]

I am of the mind that if she is able to enter Canada as a visitor then come as a visitor, say nothing at the border about being a PR and then just 'lay low' until she has accumulated 730 days inside Canada and then she can apply to have her PR card renewed. I wouldn't mention the matter to the IO at the border unless he/she SPECIFICALLY asks her about her status.

 

[kevs]

Thank you for your insights - just to clarify:

1) Would only the past 5 years be considered in regards of residency requirments compliance, or could the PR status be revoked for not meeting those requirements anytime in the past, eventhough they are met in the meanwhile?

2) By entering the country as a tourist, would immigration be able to track she hasn't left after 6 months?

3) Could re-entering the country as a tourist be considered as misrepresenting of her status, and lead to the PR being revoked?


There is one additional difficulty in this process, for which I would appreciate any insight that could be given:

During these years away from the country, she has officialy got divorced in her home country, and changed back to her maiden name. Her married name is on her SIN card and landing paper (which also states she is married), while her passport has her current name.

Is there anyway to get around this in Canada?

Once again, thank you.

 

[Leon]

1) Would only the past 5 years be considered in regards of residency requirments compliance, or could the PR status be revoked for not meeting those requirements anytime in the past, eventhough they are met in the meanwhile?

2) By entering the country as a tourist, would immigration be able to track she hasn't left after 6 months?

3) Could re-entering the country as a tourist be considered as misrepresenting of her status, and lead to the PR being revoked?

1) They can only look at the past 5 years so if they don't catch her before she completes her two years, they can't do anything.

2) Since they don't have exit checks, it's unlikely.

3) Never heard of that happening.

As for the name change, is her passport now in her maiden name and does it say what her maiden name is on her landing papers? Does she have an old expired passport in her married name? Does she have any paperwork about the name change? Any of that could help.

 

[kevs]

As for the name change, is her passport now in her maiden name and does it say what her maiden name is on her landing papers? Does she have an old expired passport in her married name? Does she have any paperwork about the name change? Any of that could help.

Her current passport is under her maiden name and she does not have an old expired passport as it mandatory to hand in your old passport in her country upon renewal.

The landing papers do state her maiden name, but the SIN doesnt (it is 'First Name' 'Last Name' format)...

She does have a legal document (in her home language - not english or french) offializing the divorce.

 

[Leon]

Her current passport is under her maiden name and she does not have an old expired passport as it mandatory to hand in your old passport in her country upon renewal.

The landing papers do state her maiden name, but the SIN doesnt (it is 'First Name' 'Last Name' format)...

She does have a legal document (in her home language - not english or french) offializing the divorce.

She can get the divorce document translated by an official translator and use that as well as the landing papers to show that she had a married name while landing and now is back to maiden name.

 

[on-hold]

Thank you for your insights - just to clarify:

1) Would only the past 5 years be considered in regards of residency requirments compliance, or could the PR status be revoked for not meeting those requirements anytime in the past, eventhough they are met in the meanwhile?

2) By entering the country as a tourist, would immigration be able to track she hasn't left after 6 months?

3) Could re-entering the country as a tourist be considered as misrepresenting of her status, and lead to the PR being revoked?


There is one additional difficulty in this process, for which I would appreciate any insight that could be given:

During these years away from the country, she has officialy got divorced in her home country, and changed back to her maiden name. Her married name is on her SIN card and landing paper (which also states she is married), while her passport has her current name.

Is there anyway to get around this in Canada?

Once again, thank you.

1) They can only look at the past 5 years so if they don't catch her before she completes her two years, they can't do anything.

2) Since they don't have exit checks, it's unlikely.

3) Never heard of that happening.

As for the name change, is her passport now in her maiden name and does it say what her maiden name is on her landing papers? Does she have an old expired passport in her married name? Does she have any paperwork about the name change? Any of that could help.

It's a little off-topic, but I'm always amazed that Answer #3 doesn't happen. It's pretty much as if CIC accepts that if you can get yourself into Canada by any means -- visa-exempt passport, sob story, midnight boat crossing over the strait of Juan de Fuca -- you become invisible and your status is whatever your status was the last time you were in Canada. It would be easy for them to pass a law that states that any PR has to enter Canada using PR status and that failure to do so will cause PR status to be reviewed (i.e. the same law that exists for citizens absent the review clause), but they haven't. And I'm not griping, personally I think that the limitations on the reach of the Canadian bureaucracy is one of its great points -- but as an American, it sometimes astounds me. Is it simply because CIC isn't interested in allocating the resources that this sort of policy would require, and that they don't see any real benefit to finding people who want to live in Canada, were once considered eligible to live in Canada, but have let their status lapse?

 

[Leon]

I don't even know why they have this loophole of forgiven sins but they do. It actually says that even if a PR has spent years outside Canada but returns and stays for two years, they will meet the RO again and remain a PR. Why can they not go back in time and say sorry but you lost your PR years ago? I simply don't know the answer to that.

 

[keesio]

I don't even know why they have this loophole of forgiven sins but they do. It actually says that even if a PR has spent years outside Canada but returns and stays for two years, they will meet the RO again and remain a PR. Why can they not go back in time and say sorry but you lost your PR years ago? I simply don't know the answer to that.

Canada is extremely generous and forgiving. That is why I shake my head when I hear so many people complain about CIC and how "mean" and "cruel" they are.

 

[on-hold]

I don't even know why they have this loophole of forgiven sins but they do. It actually says that even if a PR has spent years outside Canada but returns and stays for two years, they will meet the RO again and remain a PR. Why can they not go back in time and say sorry but you lost your PR years ago? I simply don't know the answer to that.

Personally, I suspect that this might be the most pragmatic approach, and that CIC, to its credit, has avoided an 'enforce the rule' approach, and taken steps to make sure that the rule, in fact, doesn't call for enforcing. I'm sure that when they are trying to consider what to do with lapsed PRs, they consider that:

- the person already qualified for PR for some reason: language, education, criminal background are likely to be acceptable
- Canada's immigration policy requires large numbers of yearly migrants
- people who want to return presumably have some reason for doing so, they are less likely to become destitute and presumably have resources
- where's the benefit to spending resources on weeding them out retroactively? Look at how long it has taken to perform the citizenship fraud investigations.

Instead, they leave it in the hands of CBSA, which has two benefits. One, it's not CIC's responsibility and thus won't affect their budget. Two, it provides an enforcement mechanism that prevents current PRs from taking the requirements lightly (but if they do take then lightly, CIC doesn't have to do anything about it). If they wanted to be absolutely pragmatic, they would pass a law that states that people can't access certain forms of social services if their PR status is not in good standing (probably not medical, but perhaps welfare, etc.).