Hello Everyone,
Has anyone received request for supplementary evidence? Please advise.
Thank you in advance.
Has anyone received request for supplementary evidence? Please advise.
Thank you in advance.
Supplementary Evidence Request
- Thread starter average_student
- Start date
Yea 0520 .. 0519 is final notice . They ask you for credit card and bank statements, T4s, entries exits, school and health records ? It will delay the process for 2 to 6 months
not one year . All statements from the covered period (Normally in the past 4years )
They have asked 1 year of credit card statements and letter from employer with all absences.
I have two credit cards. Should I sent statement for both or just one?
My employer doesn't provide such type of letter, what would be my best option?
Yes. Many have. There are many topics here discussing the various types of requests . . . some discussions go into more detail than others.
Note that in the majority of actual citizenship cases discussed in Federal Court decisions, the applicant in those cases was asked to provide supplementary evidence as to residence or presence. So there is quite a bit of information, including official sources, discussing these types of requests which are residency or presence related . . . often referred to as "RQ-related" requests.
There are of course a number of other types of requests. Fingerprint requests are the most common. If there is a question about prohibitions, there may be a request for certified copies of official court records, or if about possible charges abroad, a request for a police clearance (apart from or in addition to those instances in which some applicants are required to provide police certificates with the application itself).
When "supplementary evidence" comes up, here, that is usually about "RQ-related" requests. And there are multiple types of RQ-related requests for additional or supplemental information or documentation, including:
-- a quality control exercise request including the form CIT 0205
-- oral requests made during the test-event interview,
-- simple letters asking for this or that particular document
-- requests known as RQ-lite, the CIT 0520, which has a list of particular requests; ordinarily SOME are checked as requests to the particular applicant receiving the CIT 0520
-- CIT 0171 which is the main "Residence Questionnaire" often referred to as the full blown RQ
-- oral requests made during the test-event interview,
-- simple letters asking for this or that particular document
-- requests known as RQ-lite, the CIT 0520, which has a list of particular requests; ordinarily SOME are checked as requests to the particular applicant receiving the CIT 0520
-- CIT 0171 which is the main "Residence Questionnaire" often referred to as the full blown RQ
While there are many topics here addressing one or more of these, some distinctions and comparisons and in-depth discussion of all these can be found in the topic titled: "RQ versus Physical Presence Questionnaires, including CIT 0205"
See https://www.canadavisa.com/canada-i...nce-questionnaires-including-cit-0205.534082/
RE CIT 0520 or RQ-LITE IN PARTICULAR:
These requests ordinarily come during or after the test-event interview (technically the Program Integrity or "PI" Interview, sometimes referred as the interview for verifying documents even though it entails more than that). The scope of the requests can vary from just one item in a list being checked to all the items, and they can include requests for specific documents in addition to those on the list. They are usually limited to a few documents. But a full request plus some is not uncommon.
As noted, these are often referred to as RQ-lite, meaning they are similar to the full blown Residence Questionnaire but are smaller in scope, or "lite." They are intended to help IRCC decision-makers resolve particular questions by requesting specific documents which should resolve any open concerns or questions about the applicant's physical presence. In contrast, the full-blown RQ (CIT 0171) essentially puts the applicant on notice that IRCC has overt doubts that the applicant met the actual physical presence requirement, and are in effect requesting the applicant to make a full case to prove presence.
My most recent copy of CIT 0520 is much older than the December 2018 version. (If anyone can post or link the more recent version, that would be appreciated.) So I rely on anecdotal reports in the forum to indicate what is currently listed on the form and what other documents are being requested.
As I noted, the CIT 0520 ordinarily makes specific requests addressed to the particular applicant. If you have been sent CIT 0520 then READ and CAREFULLY FOLLOW the INSTRUCTIONS in the SPECIFIC REQUEST YOU RECEIVED. Most of the requests are straight-forward, even if some might not be easy to obtain and provide (for example, applicants often report difficulty obtaining and submitting "Entry-Exit Records" or "Record of Movement" from certain countries).
Older versions of CIT 0520 clearly specified that the documents submitted "should cover the period _____ to _____"(asking for this in the YYYY-MM-DD format), "unless otherwise specified below." While this typically will be the beginning and end date for the FIVE year time period that constitutes the applicant's "eligibility period," the particular period of time can vary from that.
And some of the particular requests can specify a more limited time period.
So it is possible that one applicant will be asked to provide this or that documentation for a particular one-year time period, while many others are asked to prove such documentation for a longer period or even the full five year eligibility period.
Requests for banking or credit card records can be quite specific. Leading to . . . your example:
WHY BANKING or CREDIT CARD RECORDS? What do they do with one year of credit card statements?
Such records can corroborate the applicant's information about presence. Or not corroborate. They can be an indicator of ongoing presence or ties, either IN Canada or outside Canada.
So they are relevant if a Citizenship Officer needs more information to evaluate the applicant's account of where he or she was during particular periods of time.
Since the burden of proof is on the applicant, the failure to provide evidence can support a negative inference. Leading to . . .
Remember, omissions can be considered a material misrepresentation as much as an overt deception.
That said, an applicant can only provide what can be provided. If you cannot obtain a letter from your employer, obviously you cannot submit a letter from your employer.
For documents the applicant cannot provide, in the response to the CIT 0520, the applicant needs to state this and explain. That is, the applicant should (1) acknowledge he or she cannot provide the requested document, and (2) provide an honest explanation as to why not. If the employer will provide a letter stating the employer's policy about that, that could help. Whether to be more proactive than that is a personal decision. An applicant might, for example, instead obtain letters from one or more co-workers, the letters stating straight-forward facts like how they know the applicant, how long, for what time periods have they been coworkers and their respective positions, include some personal details if relevant, and maybe even confirm the employer's policy if the employer will provide even that. Keep the letters short. Stick to facts. Avoid generalizations or opinions.
As for credit card records, obviously you should provide ALL documents requested. Cherry-picking some and omitting others is a recipe that could cook up suspicions. IRCC will decide what is relevant, how it is relevant, and what weight it has.
Hi, sorry to hear about your experience. Were you asked for anything else during the processing of your application, like fingerprints?
Not sure why they would ask for the CIT 0520, especially if all your dates matched up.
If possible, I would also suggest you start collecting itineraries for each of these trips (if you still have access to them) just in case they ask for them.
They give this notice when they feel they cannot approve application just the way it is (too little convincing evidence, too much travel to count, self-employed, etc.), but they want to avoid the long way of RQ either.
Think of this request as a friendly step - "We don't want to put you in for a long haul with RQ, but we do need some more confidence, with which we hope we could just approve you on the go and hopefully we'll call you for oath in no time."
That's a hard question to answer since the case processing officer will have to make the call. It depends on the documents you have to submit in addition to the CBP FOIA request. If the CBP doesn't respond within 30 days, you will have to show proof of having made the request but not received a response yet.
If everything is good, and they are just waiting on these additional documents, it just means that your timeline is prolonged. Doesn't necessarily mean your application will be rejected or abandoned.
Just my opinion, but I don't think anything has "gone wrong" at this stage. Most times you would have to wait 1-3 months for the oath after the test anyway. Trying to guess what might've triggered this request is only going to make you more anxious, and any person's guess on this forum is as good as yours.
Right now, hopefully your FOIA request comes through within 30 days and you can submit it. Don't worry too much (easier said than done). If you're in the clear and this is just additional clarification, all you can do is wait. Good luck!
No one was actually, substantively, evaluating your qualifications until very recently, in preparation for the test and interview. All that time your application was merely sitting in one queue and then another (for example, the queue for file to be opened, another queue for local office processing agent to review the file in preparation for the test and interview event).
Many, many applicants still see a timeline of at least 3 to 6 months after the test event . . . while many others have faster timelines than that. It varies widely, to some extent wildly. Predicting how it will go for you or any particular applicant is a fool's errand.
But, since it is an application for CITIZENSHIP, which is for LIFE, which for most means many DECADES, the government does not share your view that a delay of 3 to 6 months is of much concern let alone "rather extreme."
You should make a concerted effort to provide a response to any request from IRCC, and if you are not able to do so within the time given, to nonetheless TIMELY respond with an explanation as to why what was requested cannot be provided and what you are doing to obtain the requested documentation. And it does not hurt to hope that all goes well and rather quickly.
We remember getting the same request for my wife when we applied for a new PR card and they gave us 30 days to get one from FOIA. We got an extension of 15 days from CIC I believe still we ended up submitting the I94 eventually and explained that FOIA request was made but couldn't get that in time (although explained to FOIA regarding the urgency). If I remember correctly, it took more than 3 months to get it although mentioned about the urgency so I know your frustration
Firstly, my condolences for what you are going through. Whatever the reason this entire process can be quite stressful especially when extra requests like this are made and so late in the process.
I'd like to provide an anecdote from a friends PR application a few years ago as I think it could be helpful here. In that case they were applying as a couple, for the first five months of an EE (6 month timescale) application the primary applicant was asked for various bits of info. And then they suddenly sent a request for a US PCC, at five months into a six month process. As with almost everything from the IRCC they had 30 days.
Unfortunately a US PCC goes through the FBI which has (well had) a 12-16 week processing time. It took 14 weeks. And this is despite the person in question having spent < 6 months (by about a month) in the US which is the normal PR requirement.
They told the IRCC it had been requested and would take some more time, at the end of the day IRCC is a group of humans who understand that some things are outside the applicants control.
The friends both applied for citizenship a few months ago (and are of course, still waiting for AoR
).In another story, a different friend had a long convoluted process that I won't go into here but she had similar timescales which were impossible to meet with the IRCC due to other parties involvement whom don't like doing things quickly. Once again, she went way way over the 30 day timescale but explained the situation and got it all resolved.
