Applying for a SIN with expired PR Card (crossed US border on H&C grounds)

[geiru]

Hello everyone,

I became a permanent resident back in 2009 when I was only 13 years old, and only stayed a month in Canada before going back to the Philippines with my parents. I didn't get an SIN then because I was still a minor.

I flew to the US last month, crossed the border and was let in on H&C grounds with the officer mentioning they opted not to report me and apparently left a note on my file on the immigration system to help with my PR renewal in the future. My PR card is expired and I don't think I'll be able to renew it until I've stayed here for 2 years, which I plan to do, but now I'm in limbo where I've been let in, but can't apply for an SIN and legally work until I renew my PR card in at least 2 years.

Is there any way for me to get an SIN with an expired PR card? I went to Service Canada to ask if a letter from a lawyer would help but apparently it would not. Would getting a Verification of Status help?

Any help would be appreciated, thank you!

 

[Tubsmagee]

Hello everyone,

I became a permanent resident back in 2009 when I was only 13 years old, and only stayed a month in Canada before going back to the Philippines with my parents. I didn't get an SIN then because I was still a minor.

I flew to the US last month, crossed the border and was let in on H&C grounds with the officer mentioning they opted not to report me and apparently left a note on my file on the immigration system to help with my PR renewal in the future. My PR card is expired and I don't think I'll be able to renew it until I've stayed here for 2 years, which I plan to do, but now I'm in limbo where I've been let in, but can't apply for an SIN and legally work until I renew my PR card in at least 2 years.

Is there any way for me to get an SIN with an expired PR card? I went to Service Canada to ask if a letter from a lawyer would help but apparently it would not. Would getting a Verification of Status help?

Any help would be appreciated, thank you!

From what you have written it sounds like you were waived through rather than an H&C decision being made. If, for example, you had received a PRTD for H&C reasons (coded RC-1), it would likely be safe to simply apply for the PR card. As that didn’t occur, there is some risk of a negative determination being made if you applied for a PR card while not compliant with RO.

Verification of status - seems to be a plain piece of paper with landing information . I don’t think it is useful for anything, unless you need the date/location for an application.

Others may have wiser advice but it seems your options are to wait for their to be no question about your RO being compliant and then apply for PR card and SIN (this would mean two years from when you returned plus processing times) or take a risk and simply apply for your PR card now based on H&C, making clear that you had no choice about leaving country after landing and that you returned at the first opportunity. Unfortunately, since you waited for several years after you became an adult, there is an increased likelihood of an unfavorable decision.

As an aside, there was likely no issue with your getting a SIN when you first landed, despite being a minor. As noted elsewhere on the board, there are several members (including me) who applied for SINs for their minor children without issue.

 

[armoured]

While not directly related to your case, you could read some threads here on those who have 'dormant' SIN status. It's a roughly analogous situation, those who are in Canada as PRs - like you, not in compliance - and often returned recently and find their SIN has been placed in dormant status.

Here's one:
https://www.canadavisa.com/canada-immigration-discussion-board/threads/pr-card-expired，how-can-i-get-a-driving-license-urgent-help-needed.772648/page-4#post-10154997

But the upshot is: I do not believe there is a danger in applying for the SIN. It is a different department.

And while not a lawyer, I don't see that there's any part of the laws and regs about SINs that would allow the government to deny a legal resident a SIN - and you are a legal resident, even if non-compliant. The government CAN require you to prove you're eligible for a SIN - but being non-compliant with RO does not make you ineligible (on its own, anyway). But the government between departments should be able to confirm and determine that you are, indeed, a PR (you have a UCI#, for example).

In short, there's a decent legal argument to be made - I believe anyway - to request/compel the govenrment to issue you one. So speak to a lawyer - mainly a labour law lawyer - with your one proviso, that you have good reasont o believe it's not a good idea to apply for a PR card right away.*

I dont' have a dog in this fight apart from my belief it is incredibly stupid from a public policy perspective to keep legal residents from working legally and paying taxes (and instead incentivizing them to 'get by' somehow - ie. work illegally or make recourse to public assistance).

*For the PR status and PR card - I note your interaction with the officer at the border, you were "... let in on H&C grounds with the officer mentioning they opted not to report me and apparently left a note on my file on the immigration system to help with my PR renewal in the future."

You really probably should consult a lawyer on this matter as well. While unfortunately the CBSA officer did not provide you with anything in writing, it's possible that this is a good basis to apply for a PR card - but as noted, you should check if possible. I do not know whether an access-to-information request would be able to dislodge from CBSA records what kind of note was made in the system, nor how to do so. But it is worth considering or discussing with someone with the knowledge. It's possible that applying for a PR card would just be delayed with no movement for quite some time to see if you leave Canada (and a decision not much faster than waiting). No way to know, really.

The one serious caution I'd make, until you get this resolved - remain in Canada.

 

[canuck78]

While not directly related to your case, you could read some threads here on those who have 'dormant' SIN status. It's a roughly analogous situation, those who are in Canada as PRs - like you, not in compliance - and often returned recently and find their SIN has been placed in dormant status.

Here's one:
https://www.canadavisa.com/canada-immigration-discussion-board/threads/pr-card-expired，how-can-i-get-a-driving-license-urgent-help-needed.772648/page-4#post-10154997

But the upshot is: I do not believe there is a danger in applying for the SIN. It is a different department.

And while not a lawyer, I don't see that there's any part of the laws and regs about SINs that would allow the government to deny a legal resident a SIN - and you are a legal resident, even if non-compliant. The government CAN require you to prove you're eligible for a SIN - but being non-compliant with RO does not make you ineligible (on its own, anyway). But the government between departments should be able to confirm and determine that you are, indeed, a PR (you have a UCI#, for example).

In short, there's a decent legal argument to be made - I believe anyway - to request/compel the govenrment to issue you one. So speak to a lawyer - mainly a labour law lawyer - with your one proviso, that you have good reasont o believe it's not a good idea to apply for a PR card right away.*

I dont' have a dog in this fight apart from my belief it is incredibly stupid from a public policy perspective to keep legal residents from working legally and paying taxes (and instead incentivizing them to 'get by' somehow - ie. work illegally or make recourse to public assistance).

*For the PR status and PR card - I note your interaction with the officer at the border, you were "... let in on H&C grounds with the officer mentioning they opted not to report me and apparently left a note on my file on the immigration system to help with my PR renewal in the future."

You really probably should consult a lawyer on this matter as well. While unfortunately the CBSA officer did not provide you with anything in writing, it's possible that this is a good basis to apply for a PR card - but as noted, you should check if possible. I do not know whether an access-to-information request would be able to dislodge from CBSA records what kind of note was made in the system, nor how to do so. But it is worth considering or discussing with someone with the knowledge. It's possible that applying for a PR card would just be delayed with no movement for quite some time to see if you leave Canada (and a decision not much faster than waiting). No way to know, really.

The one serious caution I'd make, until you get this resolved - remain in Canada.

The issue is that they no longer qualify to apply for a SIN# without a PR card. You only have a year to apply from your soft landing date. There is no way to get a SIN# without a PR card at this point.

 

[armoured]

The issue is that they no longer qualify to apply for a SIN# without a PR card. You only have a year to apply from your soft landing date. There is no way to get a SIN# without a PR card at this point.

I don't wish to quibble about definitions (administrative requirements are not what 'qualifies' one to have a right to work), so I'll make it explicit: I believe that a legal challenge is needed to force Service Canada (or the relevant ministry) to provide a SIN# (or to provide a document that confirms right to work i.e. PR status). Government can't just hide behind a 'we require this document that we won't give you even though you're a legal resident' catch-22 for something as basic as the right to work.

-the legal requirement to get a SIN# that applies in this case is to be a legal resident, i.e. permanent resident or citizen of Canada. (I'm going to ignore things like working visas, students, etc).
-This flows directly from what being a PR 'means' - they have the right to work in Canada.
-What you are referring to as 'qualifying' are the administrative requirements that Service Canada (on behalf of the relevant ministry) requires to allocate a SIN#.
-Those administrative requirements are not what 'qualify' one to be allowed to work - a condition that is met if the person is a PR by right. (And for all intents and purposes a SIN# is a requirement to work)
-"The government" can make reasonable administrative requirements, but not unreasonable ones.

There are at least two logical and simple solutions to this that a court could require of government, possibly by specific requirement, or possibly by simply requiring government 'fix it'):
-For Service Canada to issue SIN on the reasonable basis that someone with a COPR/record of landing "was" (and presumably is) a PR, and that if 'the government' wishes to post-issuance pursue someone who is no longer a PR, it can do so.
-For Service Canada to obtain / IRCC to provide, as needed, confirmation that the applicant is a PR. (This is a database check that would take ten minutes, as long as privacy protections are respected - for which there is ample evidence that government can resolve internally.)

There are other possible solutions of course - IRCC could provide some document that 'person X is a permanent resident as of [date.]'

While the public policy factors I mentioned above (i.e. it is STUPID) are not usually legal reasons for a court to make such a decision, they ARE reasons that a court can take into consideration, and particularly in response to any government defence that it provides for why it cannot do a thing. If govt says forcing them to do such a thing is a problem (costs, whatever), it can be placed against the cost to government of continuing (lower tax collection etc).

Of course, a legal challenge is not an easy thing, and I'd also suggest any individual in this situation request assistance from their MP, MPP, local newspaper, advocacy organisation, etc.

 

[canuck78]

I don't wish to quibble about definitions (administrative requirements are not what 'qualifies' one to have a right to work), so I'll make it explicit: I believe that a legal challenge is needed to force Service Canada (or the relevant ministry) to provide a SIN# (or to provide a document that confirms right to work i.e. PR status). Government can't just hide behind a 'we require this document that we won't give you even though you're a legal resident' catch-22 for something as basic as the right to work.

-the legal requirement to get a SIN# that applies in this case is to be a legal resident, i.e. permanent resident or citizen of Canada. (I'm going to ignore things like working visas, students, etc).
-This flows directly from what being a PR 'means' - they have the right to work in Canada.
-What you are referring to as 'qualifying' are the administrative requirements that Service Canada (on behalf of the relevant ministry) requires to allocate a SIN#.
-Those administrative requirements are not what 'qualify' one to be allowed to work - a condition that is met if the person is a PR by right. (And for all intents and purposes a SIN# is a requirement to work)
-"The government" can make reasonable administrative requirements, but not unreasonable ones.

There are at least two logical and simple solutions to this that a court could require of government, possibly by specific requirement, or possibly by simply requiring government 'fix it'):
-For Service Canada to issue SIN on the reasonable basis that someone with a COPR/record of landing "was" (and presumably is) a PR, and that if 'the government' wishes to post-issuance pursue someone who is no longer a PR, it can do so.
-For Service Canada to obtain / IRCC to provide, as needed, confirmation that the applicant is a PR. (This is a database check that would take ten minutes, as long as privacy protections are respected - for which there is ample evidence that government can resolve internally.)

There are other possible solutions of course - IRCC could provide some document that 'person X is a permanent resident as of [date.]'

While the public policy factors I mentioned above (i.e. it is STUPID) are not usually legal reasons for a court to make such a decision, they ARE reasons that a court can take into consideration, and particularly in response to any government defence that it provides for why it cannot do a thing. If govt says forcing them to do such a thing is a problem (costs, whatever), it can be placed against the cost to government of continuing (lower tax collection etc).

Of course, a legal challenge is not an easy thing, and I'd also suggest any individual in this situation request assistance from their MP, MPP, local newspaper, advocacy organisation, etc.

They can certainly but wouldn’t suggest going to the media given that they don’t meet their RO and were luckily waived through the border. They risk highlighting their lack of compliance with their RO so there are potential consequences to pursuing the SIN# issue especially publicly. Consulting with an immigration lawyer would be a good idea but pursuing this would also come with a cost.

 

[armoured]

They can certainly but wouldn’t suggest going to the media given that they don’t meet their RO and were luckily waived through the border. They risk highlighting their lack of compliance with their RO so there are potential consequences to pursuing the SIN# issue especially publicly. Consulting with an immigration lawyer would be a good idea but pursuing this would also come with a cost.

Yes, legal assistance is not free.

Yes, there are potential consequences in certain circumstances - but again, a PR who is not in compliance is in Canada legally. If they do not undertake other steps that would cause an examination, there's no legal basis that I'm aware of to do anything to the PR.

Worth getting legal advice, but I would also suggest a labour lawyer is worth consulting - because they'd know the state of play about reasonable requirements for the SIN.

Yes, 'going public' is a suggestion that should only be done in this case with professional advice and/or an advocacy group.

 

[canuck78]

Yes, legal assistance is not free.

Yes, there are potential consequences in certain circumstances - but again, a PR who is not in compliance is in Canada legally. If they do not undertake other steps that would cause an examination, there's no legal basis that I'm aware of to do anything to the PR.

Worth getting legal advice, but I would also suggest a labour lawyer is worth consulting - because they'd know the state of play about reasonable requirements for the SIN.

Yes, 'going public' is a suggestion that should only be done in this case with professional advice and/or an advocacy group.

No matter what this isn’t likely to get resolved quickly.