+1(514) 937-9445 or Toll-free (Canada & US) +1 (888) 947-9445

Any information on Citizenship application rejection or delays due to PNP obligation?

Mar 8, 2021
49
4
Hey All,

Has anyone encountered any issues or delays in their citizenship application because they did not spend "enough" time in the province they were nominated for? For context, I was an OINP nominee and lived for about 10 months in ON before moving to BC. The reason for the move was because I got a much better job offer.

The reason I ask is because recently I came across a post where the applicant was a PNP nominees (one of the smaller provinces - PEI, SK) and has their citizenship application in progress for ~3 years. They say they got a procedural fairness letter now stating they did not stay in the province nor did they make an effort to contribute to the province. There is an appeal process but the lawyers don't seem very positive.

I will soon apply for my citizenship and want to be prepared if this is a common scenario.

Thanks.
 

akbardxb

Champion Member
Nov 18, 2013
1,244
463
Mississauga
LANDED..........
28-03-2014
Hey All,

Has anyone encountered any issues or delays in their citizenship application because they did not spend "enough" time in the province they were nominated for? For context, I was an OINP nominee and lived for about 10 months in ON before moving to BC. The reason for the move was because I got a much better job offer.

The reason I ask is because recently I came across a post where the applicant was a PNP nominees (one of the smaller provinces - PEI, SK) and has their citizenship application in progress for ~3 years. They say they got a procedural fairness letter now stating they did not stay in the province nor did they make an effort to contribute to the province. There is an appeal process but the lawyers don't seem very positive.

I will soon apply for my citizenship and want to be prepared if this is a common scenario.

Thanks.
Unlikely that anyone on the forum can say with certainty whether you are likely to get a similar response from IRCC or not. Even if you have a similar case, not sure how would you prepare for this scenario before hand. Best to engage a lawyer if you land in a similar situation or have one of those quick / free consultations before hand to assess the potential fallout.

Given the tendency of new immigrants to gravitate towards GTA / GVA, I would not be surprised if this becomes a norm in future and/or the regulations tightened around this aspect even though the legal implications from a charter perspective can only be argued by lawyers.

All provinces would have an approved quota / limit under PNP and someone moving out-of-province is essentially 'wasting' that quota - probably more critical for the smaller provinces.
 

armoured

VIP Member
Feb 1, 2015
15,227
7,755
They say they got a procedural fairness letter now stating they did not stay in the province nor did they make an effort to contribute to the province.
While it's impossible for anyone outside to say with certainty, I think the fact pattern of the specific case matters immensely. Unfortunately not much information comes out about specifics when someone has one of these cases, such as the one you mention.

At any rate: my somewhat-educated guess is that your fact pattern of residing (and working, it sounds like) in Ontario for 10 months, and all associated with that and only after that leaving to another province is a relatively low risk situation.

Because 'they did [not] make an effort' is subjective, I doubt govt would pursue unless fact pattern was clear and possibly egregious.

And it's clear that there are cases where the PNP nominees really made no effort whatsoever, did not stay for any appreciable length of time, and in some cases went to some effort to mislead that they'd ever set foot in the province by using a deceptive service for a fake address (there was a news story about a related case).

Now unfortunately: I can't tell you and I dont' think anyone could with certainty whether there is some clearcut line, like six months or something, that would be 'safe.' Speak to a lawyer is not bad advice (to extent there are cases they can get history of).

Note, this is backward looking, i.e you have already done what you did - for those looking forward and wanting to be 'more careful', my guess is that a year in the nominating province would be pretty damn safe/low risk.
 

dpenabill

VIP Member
Apr 2, 2010
6,252
3,018
NOTE: I do not currently follow the particular procedures for obtaining PR status, and am not familiar with the nomination programs in particular provinces. There are discussions related to this subject in the PR Obligations part of this site, but you may need to dive into the back pages to find them. I believe there are more focused discussions related to these programs, and issues related to moving out of province, in the Provincial Nomination Program Immigration forum here: https://www.canadavisa.com/canada-immigration-discussion-board/forums/provincial-nomination-program-immigration.6/
and also some in the Permanent Residence in Canada forum here: https://www.canadavisa.com/canada-immigration-discussion-board/forums/permanent-residence-in-canada.57/

However, I do follow misrepresentation cases. Which is a major component of this subject.


Has anyone encountered any issues or delays in their citizenship application because they did not spend "enough" time in the province they were nominated for? For context, I was an OINP nominee and lived for about 10 months in ON before moving to BC. The reason for the move was because I got a much better job offer.

The reason I ask is because recently I came across a post where the applicant was a PNP nominees (one of the smaller provinces - PEI, SK) and has their citizenship application in progress for ~3 years. They say they got a procedural fairness letter now stating they did not stay in the province nor did they make an effort to contribute to the province. There is an appeal process but the lawyers don't seem very positive.

I will soon apply for my citizenship and want to be prepared if this is a common scenario.
In addition to observations by @akbardxb and @armoured . . .

To be clear, there is a great deal about this subject I do not know or understand. But I will say, based on what I have seen, and even more so on what we have not seen in this forum, my GUESS is that moving after ten months seems unlikely to trigger a problem. That's just a guess. It is based in significant part on recognizing (it appears) there are scores of PRs who, similar to you, move out of the nominating province sometime after landing, while in contrast reports of problems because of that are not common. It is also based on an assumption you have not otherwise created a paper/digital trail indicating you were looking for employment or a residence in another province BEFORE or very soon after landing and becoming a PR.


Misrepresentation is the essential underlying issue here: did the PR obtain status by misrepresentations made during the process of obtaining PR status through a provincial nomination program?

In the broad sense, the issue is whether the nominee's representations about intentions, plans, or commitments, in regards to settling and working in the nominating province, were in effect fraudulent. It appears that a significant number of prospective immigrants see the provincial programs as a means for obtaining PR status in Canada with little or no real intention of settling and working in the nominating province.

Once a provincial nominee has landed, and is a PR, the Charter mobility rights are in effect and a PR is entitled to move to any province. (Note: I am not at all sure, but there may be some exceptions, noting that certain programs in New Brunswick have been mentioned in this regard.)

To be clear, however, moving to another province can nonetheless constitute evidence the PR made misrepresentations about their intentions or plans.

Thus, how long the PR stayed in the nominating province, after landing, is only indirect, circumstantial evidence of what the PR's intentions were prior to, and right up to the landing. While I cannot say for sure (and it is unlikely anyone else here can either), the importance of the timeline for moving out of the nominating province is mostly whether it triggers elevated scrutiny and, in particular, an investigation of the PR, looking into the details of the PR's path to obtaining nomination and PR status, to discern if there was misrepresentation.

Like many other issues a PR can encounter, what triggers inquiry, an investigation, is often a key component. Once triggered, the dynamics of the situation can and typically do change considerably.

A short, and particularly a very short timeline, is more likely to trigger suspicion and inquiry, if not an outright investigation. The longer the timeline the less likely it will trigger suspicion.

Beyond that, again the timeline can be circumstantial evidence the PR did not have the intention to settle and work in the province as represented in the process of obtaining the nomination and in the process of landing. Other than a timeline so short that on its face it more or less says there was no real (truthful) intent to settle in the province, once an investigation is triggered then CBSA/IRCC will focus on other evidence (I am not sure but believe that it will primarily be CBSA, perhaps its NSSD, that will conduct the investigation). My sense is that many of the cases where there is a misrepresentation prosecution (typically not criminal, but as to inadmissibility for misrepresentation), there has been some additional source indicating reason to suspect and providing evidence to show misrepresentation. Sometimes, it appears, there are provincial authorities who probe the PR's case and make a referral to IRCC/CBSA, part of provincial program integrity measures. Sometimes there is a whistleblower. (In addition to employers feeling duped, it appears that disgruntled sexual partners or even former spouses tend to be among the more common "informants.")

No special expertise in criminology necessary, however, to recognize that a nominee (pre-PR) who searches for, let alone applies for employment, or actually enters into a prospective employment arrangement outside the nominating province, is creating a paper/digital trail of an intent to obtain employment outside the nominating province, more or less demonstrating any representations about settling in the nominating province are not truthful. Obviously, likewise as to efforts to secure a residence outside the nominating province.

While such job search exercises (likewise shopping for a residence) very soon after landing do not directly prove misrepresentation, here too the sooner after landing that takes place, the stronger the circumstantial evidence of misrepresentation.

Relationship To Citizenship Application in Particular:

Prosecution for misrepresentation in the provincial PR nomination process can be initiated or triggered apart from making an application for citizenship. Actually this is something more often screened prior to and during the landing process.

One might ask who would be so stupid, but among the more typical cases the would-be Canadian immigrant will go through a provincial nomination program, get PR approved, and arrive at a Port-of-Entry clearly not headed for the nominating province, and sometimes even clearly headed for a job in a province other than the nominating province. No go.

So far as anecdotal reporting in this forum goes, prosecution for misrepresentation in the provincial PR nomination process triggered by a citizenship application, does NOT appear to be "common," but of course you have yourself answered your question in part, as to whether anyone has encountered this, referencing a post illustrating that yes, indeed, someone has. And there are indeed multiple, similar reports, albeit only occasionally and mostly scattered about in other parts of the forum.

The role a citizenship application has in this is the extent to which the information submitted in a citizenship application, which must include address and employment history for a full five years, suggests that during the procedure for obtaining PR status in one of these programs, the PR/applicant misrepresented their intentions in regards to employment in the nominating province. In making a citizenship application the PR must provide IRCC what amounts to precise information about how long they were in the nominating province and how long they were employed there. Some of the anecdotal reports in the forum involve cases in which the PR spent less than ten weeks, some even less than ten days, and in addition to those who never worked at all in the nominating province (but at least spent some time there, at the least purportedly seeking employment there), there have been some who went directly to a different province upon landing.

That is, to some extent it can be what the PR reports in address and work history, in the citizenship application, which draws attention and potentially triggers inquiry or an investigation.

A PR can always wait to make the citizenship application so that the eligibility period covered in address and employment history is well past the year in which they landed as a provincial nominee. And, indeed, actually there can be many circumstances in which a PR might decide to delay making a citizenship application to put some of their personal history outside the eligibility period (many, for example, may have had rather messy transient circumstances for a year or even longer after landing, and a pattern of address, work, and travel history that is so messy it would be better to wait to apply past having to declare it in detail, especially those who do not have good records for such time periods, and even more so if they cannot be certain of their travel dates).
 
  • Like
Reactions: rajatkhare

rajatkhare

Full Member
Dec 2, 2018
48
3
NOTE: I do not currently follow the particular procedures for obtaining PR status, and am not familiar with the nomination programs in particular provinces. There are discussions related to this subject in the PR Obligations part of this site, but you may need to dive into the back pages to find them. I believe there are more focused discussions related to these programs, and issues related to moving out of province, in the Provincial Nomination Program Immigration forum here: https://www.canadavisa.com/canada-immigration-discussion-board/forums/provincial-nomination-program-immigration.6/
and also some in the Permanent Residence in Canada forum here: https://www.canadavisa.com/canada-immigration-discussion-board/forums/permanent-residence-in-canada.57/

However, I do follow misrepresentation cases. Which is a major component of this subject.




In addition to observations by @akbardxb and @armoured . . .

To be clear, there is a great deal about this subject I do not know or understand. But I will say, based on what I have seen, and even more so on what we have not seen in this forum, my GUESS is that moving after ten months seems unlikely to trigger a problem. That's just a guess. It is based in significant part on recognizing (it appears) there are scores of PRs who, similar to you, move out of the nominating province sometime after landing, while in contrast reports of problems because of that are not common. It is also based on an assumption you have not otherwise created a paper/digital trail indicating you were looking for employment or a residence in another province BEFORE or very soon after landing and becoming a PR.


Misrepresentation is the essential underlying issue here: did the PR obtain status by misrepresentations made during the process of obtaining PR status through a provincial nomination program?

In the broad sense, the issue is whether the nominee's representations about intentions, plans, or commitments, in regards to settling and working in the nominating province, were in effect fraudulent. It appears that a significant number of prospective immigrants see the provincial programs as a means for obtaining PR status in Canada with little or no real intention of settling and working in the nominating province.

Once a provincial nominee has landed, and is a PR, the Charter mobility rights are in effect and a PR is entitled to move to any province. (Note: I am not at all sure, but there may be some exceptions, noting that certain programs in New Brunswick have been mentioned in this regard.)

To be clear, however, moving to another province can nonetheless constitute evidence the PR made misrepresentations about their intentions or plans.

Thus, how long the PR stayed in the nominating province, after landing, is only indirect, circumstantial evidence of what the PR's intentions were prior to, and right up to the landing. While I cannot say for sure (and it is unlikely anyone else here can either), the importance of the timeline for moving out of the nominating province is mostly whether it triggers elevated scrutiny and, in particular, an investigation of the PR, looking into the details of the PR's path to obtaining nomination and PR status, to discern if there was misrepresentation.

Like many other issues a PR can encounter, what triggers inquiry, an investigation, is often a key component. Once triggered, the dynamics of the situation can and typically do change considerably.

A short, and particularly a very short timeline, is more likely to trigger suspicion and inquiry, if not an outright investigation. The longer the timeline the less likely it will trigger suspicion.

Beyond that, again the timeline can be circumstantial evidence the PR did not have the intention to settle and work in the province as represented in the process of obtaining the nomination and in the process of landing. Other than a timeline so short that on its face it more or less says there was no real (truthful) intent to settle in the province, once an investigation is triggered then CBSA/IRCC will focus on other evidence (I am not sure but believe that it will primarily be CBSA, perhaps its NSSD, that will conduct the investigation). My sense is that many of the cases where there is a misrepresentation prosecution (typically not criminal, but as to inadmissibility for misrepresentation), there has been some additional source indicating reason to suspect and providing evidence to show misrepresentation. Sometimes, it appears, there are provincial authorities who probe the PR's case and make a referral to IRCC/CBSA, part of provincial program integrity measures. Sometimes there is a whistleblower. (In addition to employers feeling duped, it appears that disgruntled sexual partners or even former spouses tend to be among the more common "informants.")

No special expertise in criminology necessary, however, to recognize that a nominee (pre-PR) who searches for, let alone applies for employment, or actually enters into a prospective employment arrangement outside the nominating province, is creating a paper/digital trail of an intent to obtain employment outside the nominating province, more or less demonstrating any representations about settling in the nominating province are not truthful. Obviously, likewise as to efforts to secure a residence outside the nominating province.

While such job search exercises (likewise shopping for a residence) very soon after landing do not directly prove misrepresentation, here too the sooner after landing that takes place, the stronger the circumstantial evidence of misrepresentation.

Relationship To Citizenship Application in Particular:

Prosecution for misrepresentation in the provincial PR nomination process can be initiated or triggered apart from making an application for citizenship. Actually this is something more often screened prior to and during the landing process.

One might ask who would be so stupid, but among the more typical cases the would-be Canadian immigrant will go through a provincial nomination program, get PR approved, and arrive at a Port-of-Entry clearly not headed for the nominating province, and sometimes even clearly headed for a job in a province other than the nominating province. No go.

So far as anecdotal reporting in this forum goes, prosecution for misrepresentation in the provincial PR nomination process triggered by a citizenship application, does NOT appear to be "common," but of course you have yourself answered your question in part, as to whether anyone has encountered this, referencing a post illustrating that yes, indeed, someone has. And there are indeed multiple, similar reports, albeit only occasionally and mostly scattered about in other parts of the forum.

The role a citizenship application has in this is the extent to which the information submitted in a citizenship application, which must include address and employment history for a full five years, suggests that during the procedure for obtaining PR status in one of these programs, the PR/applicant misrepresented their intentions in regards to employment in the nominating province. In making a citizenship application the PR must provide IRCC what amounts to precise information about how long they were in the nominating province and how long they were employed there. Some of the anecdotal reports in the forum involve cases in which the PR spent less than ten weeks, some even less than ten days, and in addition to those who never worked at all in the nominating province (but at least spent some time there, at the least purportedly seeking employment there), there have been some who went directly to a different province upon landing.

That is, to some extent it can be what the PR reports in address and work history, in the citizenship application, which draws attention and potentially triggers inquiry or an investigation.

A PR can always wait to make the citizenship application so that the eligibility period covered in address and employment history is well past the year in which they landed as a provincial nominee. And, indeed, actually there can be many circumstances in which a PR might decide to delay making a citizenship application to put some of their personal history outside the eligibility period (many, for example, may have had rather messy transient circumstances for a year or even longer after landing, and a pattern of address, work, and travel history that is so messy it would be better to wait to apply past having to declare it in detail, especially those who do not have good records for such time periods, and even more so if they cannot be certain of their travel dates).
Do you have an opinion on a case wherein a person moves to Canada under OINP and stays in Ontario, but works remotely for a company in another province? Will that somehow make things harder for them considering citizenship and/or other aspects of living there?
 

dpenabill

VIP Member
Apr 2, 2010
6,252
3,018
Do you have an opinion on a case wherein a person moves to Canada under OINP and stays in Ontario, but works remotely for a company in another province? Will that somehow make things harder for them considering citizenship and/or other aspects of living there?
No, I don't have an opinion about this. As I noted, I really am not all that familiar with these programs.

Generally, so far as I have seen, those who are honest in their dealings with the Canadian government have little to worry about in regards to misrepresentation prosecutions.

Of course in regards to this subject, so much depends on "intent," which is variable and malleable, and it will change over time, and absent truthful declarations of intent or conduct demonstrating an obvious intent (pointing a gun and pulling the trigger will generally prove intent to kill), it can be rather difficult to establish. As I noted before, it appears that the screening for misrepresentation as to intent in these programs is mostly focused on interdiction BEFORE landing, or at least by the time of landing, to identify this kind of fraud in time to block the individual from actually obtaining PR status. Those are the kind of cases I have seen in published IAD decisions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rajatkhare

armoured

VIP Member
Feb 1, 2015
15,227
7,755
Do you have an opinion on a case wherein a person moves to Canada under OINP and stays in Ontario, but works remotely for a company in another province? Will that somehow make things harder for them considering citizenship and/or other aspects of living there?
Unless the program specifically requires working for a company in that province (which I don't think any of them do), should be no problem. They require you to live there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rajatkhare

upon

Champion Member
Jan 23, 2020
1,634
351
Winnipeg
NOTE: I do not currently follow the particular procedures for obtaining PR status, and am not familiar with the nomination programs in particular provinces. There are discussions related to this subject in the PR Obligations part of this site, but you may need to dive into the back pages to find them. I believe there are more focused discussions related to these programs, and issues related to moving out of province, in the Provincial Nomination Program Immigration forum here: https://www.canadavisa.com/canada-immigration-discussion-board/forums/provincial-nomination-program-immigration.6/
and also some in the Permanent Residence in Canada forum here: https://www.canadavisa.com/canada-immigration-discussion-board/forums/permanent-residence-in-canada.57/

However, I do follow misrepresentation cases. Which is a major component of this subject.




In addition to observations by @akbardxb and @armoured . . .

To be clear, there is a great deal about this subject I do not know or understand. But I will say, based on what I have seen, and even more so on what we have not seen in this forum, my GUESS is that moving after ten months seems unlikely to trigger a problem. That's just a guess. It is based in significant part on recognizing (it appears) there are scores of PRs who, similar to you, move out of the nominating province sometime after landing, while in contrast reports of problems because of that are not common. It is also based on an assumption you have not otherwise created a paper/digital trail indicating you were looking for employment or a residence in another province BEFORE or very soon after landing and becoming a PR.


Misrepresentation is the essential underlying issue here: did the PR obtain status by misrepresentations made during the process of obtaining PR status through a provincial nomination program?

In the broad sense, the issue is whether the nominee's representations about intentions, plans, or commitments, in regards to settling and working in the nominating province, were in effect fraudulent. It appears that a significant number of prospective immigrants see the provincial programs as a means for obtaining PR status in Canada with little or no real intention of settling and working in the nominating province.

Once a provincial nominee has landed, and is a PR, the Charter mobility rights are in effect and a PR is entitled to move to any province. (Note: I am not at all sure, but there may be some exceptions, noting that certain programs in New Brunswick have been mentioned in this regard.)

To be clear, however, moving to another province can nonetheless constitute evidence the PR made misrepresentations about their intentions or plans.

Thus, how long the PR stayed in the nominating province, after landing, is only indirect, circumstantial evidence of what the PR's intentions were prior to, and right up to the landing. While I cannot say for sure (and it is unlikely anyone else here can either), the importance of the timeline for moving out of the nominating province is mostly whether it triggers elevated scrutiny and, in particular, an investigation of the PR, looking into the details of the PR's path to obtaining nomination and PR status, to discern if there was misrepresentation.

Like many other issues a PR can encounter, what triggers inquiry, an investigation, is often a key component. Once triggered, the dynamics of the situation can and typically do change considerably.

A short, and particularly a very short timeline, is more likely to trigger suspicion and inquiry, if not an outright investigation. The longer the timeline the less likely it will trigger suspicion.

Beyond that, again the timeline can be circumstantial evidence the PR did not have the intention to settle and work in the province as represented in the process of obtaining the nomination and in the process of landing. Other than a timeline so short that on its face it more or less says there was no real (truthful) intent to settle in the province, once an investigation is triggered then CBSA/IRCC will focus on other evidence (I am not sure but believe that it will primarily be CBSA, perhaps its NSSD, that will conduct the investigation). My sense is that many of the cases where there is a misrepresentation prosecution (typically not criminal, but as to inadmissibility for misrepresentation), there has been some additional source indicating reason to suspect and providing evidence to show misrepresentation. Sometimes, it appears, there are provincial authorities who probe the PR's case and make a referral to IRCC/CBSA, part of provincial program integrity measures. Sometimes there is a whistleblower. (In addition to employers feeling duped, it appears that disgruntled sexual partners or even former spouses tend to be among the more common "informants.")

No special expertise in criminology necessary, however, to recognize that a nominee (pre-PR) who searches for, let alone applies for employment, or actually enters into a prospective employment arrangement outside the nominating province, is creating a paper/digital trail of an intent to obtain employment outside the nominating province, more or less demonstrating any representations about settling in the nominating province are not truthful. Obviously, likewise as to efforts to secure a residence outside the nominating province.

While such job search exercises (likewise shopping for a residence) very soon after landing do not directly prove misrepresentation, here too the sooner after landing that takes place, the stronger the circumstantial evidence of misrepresentation.

Relationship To Citizenship Application in Particular:

Prosecution for misrepresentation in the provincial PR nomination process can be initiated or triggered apart from making an application for citizenship. Actually this is something more often screened prior to and during the landing process.

One might ask who would be so stupid, but among the more typical cases the would-be Canadian immigrant will go through a provincial nomination program, get PR approved, and arrive at a Port-of-Entry clearly not headed for the nominating province, and sometimes even clearly headed for a job in a province other than the nominating province. No go.

So far as anecdotal reporting in this forum goes, prosecution for misrepresentation in the provincial PR nomination process triggered by a citizenship application, does NOT appear to be "common," but of course you have yourself answered your question in part, as to whether anyone has encountered this, referencing a post illustrating that yes, indeed, someone has. And there are indeed multiple, similar reports, albeit only occasionally and mostly scattered about in other parts of the forum.

The role a citizenship application has in this is the extent to which the information submitted in a citizenship application, which must include address and employment history for a full five years, suggests that during the procedure for obtaining PR status in one of these programs, the PR/applicant misrepresented their intentions in regards to employment in the nominating province. In making a citizenship application the PR must provide IRCC what amounts to precise information about how long they were in the nominating province and how long they were employed there. Some of the anecdotal reports in the forum involve cases in which the PR spent less than ten weeks, some even less than ten days, and in addition to those who never worked at all in the nominating province (but at least spent some time there, at the least purportedly seeking employment there), there have been some who went directly to a different province upon landing.

That is, to some extent it can be what the PR reports in address and work history, in the citizenship application, which draws attention and potentially triggers inquiry or an investigation.

A PR can always wait to make the citizenship application so that the eligibility period covered in address and employment history is well past the year in which they landed as a provincial nominee. And, indeed, actually there can be many circumstances in which a PR might decide to delay making a citizenship application to put some of their personal history outside the eligibility period (many, for example, may have had rather messy transient circumstances for a year or even longer after landing, and a pattern of address, work, and travel history that is so messy it would be better to wait to apply past having to declare it in detail, especially those who do not have good records for such time periods, and even more so if they cannot be certain of their travel dates).
Hello, what do you think about a case when person who immigrated via PNP moves to a different province when getting married to someone who lives there?
Thanks!
 

dpenabill

VIP Member
Apr 2, 2010
6,252
3,018
Hello, what do you think about a case when person who immigrated via PNP moves to a different province when getting married to someone who lives there?
Are you asking if I am I in favour of marriage or opposed? Just kidding. But the point is I am no more competent to assess a "case" involving that level of specific detail than I am competent to judge whether a particular individual should marry or not, let alone who, let alone when. Particularly in the absence of a whole lot of other relevant information about the case.

There are two key factual thresholds:
-- what facts or circumstances increase the risk of inquiry/investigation
-- what facts or circumstances increase the risk that IRCC will determine a PR is inadmissible for misrepresentation

Various circumstances will increase the risk of inquiry, including factors which trigger an investigation by provincial authorities engaged in monitoring the program for quality control purposes, and there are factors which might trigger CBSA or IRCC suspicions of misrepresentation leading to investigation. There is of course some overlap. Never actually being employed in the nominating province, for example, is probably a circumstance significantly increasing both.

Explanations, like moving to another province for compelling personal reasons arising after landing, notwithstanding having come to Canada fully intending to settle and work in the nominating province, may influence the course of an investigation in progress, but are not likely to influence whether or not something has triggered an investigation.

If accused of misrepresentation, it would of course be a defense that the PR fully intended to settle and work in the nominating province, but then (after landing) a change in circumstances led to the decision to move to another province.

Meanwhile, the details matter. Moving out of the province having made no genuine effort to settle and work there is a far different scenario than moving out nine months later, albeit other factors will still have some or a lot influence. The PR who claims to have fully intended to settle and work in the nominating province, who moves out six months after arriving in Canada and who claims that was due to a change in circumstances (like marriage to someone in another province), has a defense in fact to allegation of misrepresentation. If, however, the PR left a digital/paper trail showing that before landing they had researched job opportunities outside the nominating province or otherwise engaged in actions indicating some plan to move to another province, may find it difficult to persuade total stranger bureaucrats there was no misrepresentation in obtaining PR through a PNP program.

Many seem to want what are more or less on/off switches. That's not how it usually works. Especially when there are questions of fact tangled with an individual's state of mind (intent looming large), and a wide range in what inferences reasonable minds may make.

As I have noted before, and often, generally the PR who engages HONESTLY with CBSA and IRCC will never need to worry about being investigated for misrepresentation, let alone accused, let alone suffering the consequences of having made misrepresentations. With some exceptions of course (so yeah, the PNP PR would be prudent to do their best to settle and work in the nominating province for a significant period of time, no matter how honest they were in the process leading up to becoming a PR).
 
  • Like
Reactions: upon and akbardxb

wwww

Star Member
Apr 2, 2020
54
4
Hey All,

Has anyone encountered any issues or delays in their citizenship application because they did not spend "enough" time in the province they were nominated for? For context, I was an OINP nominee and lived for about 10 months in ON before moving to BC. The reason for the move was because I got a much better job offer.

The reason I ask is because recently I came across a post where the applicant was a PNP nominees (one of the smaller provinces - PEI, SK) and has their citizenship application in progress for ~3 years. They say they got a procedural fairness letter now stating they did not stay in the province nor did they make an effort to contribute to the province. There is an appeal process but the lawyers don't seem very positive.

I will soon apply for my citizenship and want to be prepared if this is a common scenario.

Thanks.
can you share the link of the post you are referring to? i have not been able to find that post. I am in a similar boat. Moved to Alberta in March 2021 and lived until May 2021 as I could not find job in Calgary or any other place. I did work from home from April 2021 onwards for a company in Ontario and they asked me to move to Ontario as they started work from home.
 

APPNOV2014NY

VIP Member
Nov 21, 2014
3,005
1,099
Got my PR through Quebec PNP. Spent 1 hr in Quebec for finishing landing formalities and then returned to USA.
1 year later moved to Ontario from USA.
Applied for Citizenship and currently waiting for Oath Ceremony Invitation. ( Language, Prohibitions, Background Check, Physical Presence etc. all done.)
 

wwww

Star Member
Apr 2, 2020
54
4
Got my PR through Quebec PNP. Spent 1 hr in Quebec for finishing landing formalities and then returned to USA.
1 year later moved to Ontario from USA.
Applied for Citizenship and currently waiting for Oath Ceremony Invitation. ( Language, Prohibitions, Background Check, Physical Presence etc. all done.)
did you mention anything in a cover letter with your citizenship application about moving out of province?
 

APPNOV2014NY

VIP Member
Nov 21, 2014
3,005
1,099
did you mention anything in a cover letter with your citizenship application about moving out of province?
What cover letter? I didn't send any with my Citizenship application. I am pretty sure that all "extra non-required" documents people send with their applications get tossed into trash bin without reading.
 

wwww

Star Member
Apr 2, 2020
54
4
What cover letter? I didn't send any with my Citizenship application. I am pretty sure that all "extra non-required" documents people send with their applications get tossed into trash bin without reading.
ok. cool. thanks for letting me know. i will be applying for my citizenship next year but constant questioning about moving out of province was raised by my friends which made me nervous.
 

vincent9909

Star Member
Feb 27, 2016
70
11
Hey All,

Has anyone encountered any issues or delays in their citizenship application because they did not spend "enough" time in the province they were nominated for? For context, I was an OINP nominee and lived for about 10 months in ON before moving to BC. The reason for the move was because I got a much better job offer.

The reason I ask is because recently I came across a post where the applicant was a PNP nominees (one of the smaller provinces - PEI, SK) and has their citizenship application in progress for ~3 years. They say they got a procedural fairness letter now stating they did not stay in the province nor did they make an effort to contribute to the province. There is an appeal process but the lawyers don't seem very positive.

I will soon apply for my citizenship and want to be prepared if this is a common scenario.

Thanks.
Do you know did they background completed before getting procedural fairness letter?