Attempt to cross border as PR with expired card

[dpenabill]

The key is to make no misrepresentations at the PoE. And make no mistake, notwithstanding claims to the contrary, misrepresentations made in response to questions in a Secondary examination can result in action later in time, including in processing a later application for a PR card.

But just because a PoE officer allows an individual to enter Canada as a visa-exempt visitor does not mean the individual has made a misrepresentation. Just do not deny being a PR or having PR status or otherwise overtly represent you are seeking entry as a visa-exempt visitor. Note the distinction described by kateg, and note that indicating "visiting" as the purpose of a trip is not a representation of status.

But be wary of overtly attempting the so-called, or in effect, pretending-to-be-a-visitor approach. Do not overtly pretend anything. Present your visa-exempt passport and answer questions truthfully . . . and if that leads to an examination in Secondary about residency, be upfront and honest and explain your reasons. Trying to fudge things is far more likely to make things worse, more difficult. If reported and issued a Removal Order, you can still enter Canada and appeal, and if you obtain a lawyer and settle in Canada, and with your parents in Canada, you probably have a good chance of winning the appeal.

But you probably have good odds of not encountering a problem at the PoE and so long as you make no misrepresentations that will not affect your application for a new card two years later. But if you make misrepresentations, yes that can affect things later.

 

[Canada_soon2014]

"distinction described by kateg, and note that indicating "visiting" as the purpose of a trip is not a representation of status."

Isn't it misrepresentation when you are going in with the intention of settling down, but you say you are just 'visiting'??

 

[Rob_TO]

The key is to make no misrepresentations at the PoE. And make no mistake, notwithstanding claims to the contrary, misrepresentations made in response to questions in a Secondary examination can result in action later in time, including in processing a later application for a PR card.

Mostly irrelevant as if one goes to secondary inspection, odds are they will easily see the traveler is a PR anyways. As already stated, you should not attempt to lie or misrepresent to CBSA when being asked direct questions. Always need to answer truthfully.

The only point I'm making here is that if you get into Canada without misrepresenting yourself or lying to CBSA, whether they allowed you entry as a visitor or PR will be completely irrelevant in any future PR renewal app 2+ years later.

 

[Rob_TO]

"distinction described by kateg, and note that indicating "visiting" as the purpose of a trip is not a representation of status."

Isn't it misrepresentation when you are going in with the intention of settling down, but you say you are just 'visiting'??

It's a grey area. CBSA is the one that needs to assess your "intent" on the spot. But many people enter as visitors, then change their mind and stay longer or permanently by applying to CIC to change status. The fact this is perfectly legal to do, shows they don't mind if your intent changes after you enter.

So again if you can enter without doing anything illegal, whether that was as a visitor or PR will be irrelevant in 2+ years time.

 

[kateg]

"distinction described by kateg, and note that indicating "visiting" as the purpose of a trip is not a representation of status."

Isn't it misrepresentation when you are going in with the intention of settling down, but you say you are just 'visiting'??

That would be misrepresentation, yes. Changing one's mind, however, happens regularly, and is legally fine. Intent is part of the law. Here's an example:

If you are part of the PNP program, you are asked if you intend to reside in a province. If you land, and you lie (stating that you intend to live there, but you do not), it's misrepresentation.

Now, suppose you land and are unable to find a job. This would reasonably lead to changing your mind. Or, suppose you had family in another province, and you had to switch provinces to take care of them. This would also be fine, even if it happened the day after you landed.

I am not encouraging anyone to lie - in fact, it's almost always a bad idea to do so. Should someone decide to lie, however, they need to be aware of the implications and potential consequences. It's not inconsistent to tell someone not to do drugs, and to also tell them that if they insist on doing them, that there are potential consequences, and things that make them more or less safe doing them.

Pragmatically, for the CBSA to punish someone for misrepresentation, they would need to prove that the person lied with a reasonable degree of likelihood. This could be accomplished by (for example) searching the laptop and finding a thread on Canadavisa talking about misrepresentation. Another possibility would be case notes, which would likely be taken if someone went to secondary. The burden would fall upon the CBSA to demonstrate that it was genuinely misrepresentation, and not simply changing one's mind after the fact.

There are lots of threads on the forums about what not to do. Part of that discussion often involves risks, and consequences.