Citizenship Application processing timeline disparities

[cnccnc]

Hi all applicants

Apparently we can all see processing times (getting a test invite and oath ceremony) for all applicants vary from a few months to several months and in some cases continues to be under process. So clearly there maybe some considering factors in case of each applicant that affects the processing time rather than a more incredible assumption of "agent laziness" as suggested is some threads. Viewing some timelines clearly rules out "number of stay days" as a considering factor (as long as they meet the requirement), so wonder what these considering factors maybe, perhaps the people who have already received their oath dates may consider sharing some info but in my opinion there maybe factors such as:
A) Security screening,
B) Current job status,
C) Ability to demonstrate strong ties to Canada,
D) Credit scores,
E) Tax filing info
and so on...
So for e.g. considering A) Applicants that have received FP requests seem to have longer processing times,
Considering B) Perhaps applicants in good long term contracts seem to have faster processing times, with self employed and the unemployed being the most vetted,
Considering C) Perhaps the likeliness of applicants continuing to live in Canada could be a consideration although this is a not a requirement but an applicant demonstrating stronger ties would allow an agent to give perhaps more points to someone with less stronger ties and so on.
Considering D) Credit scores do tell a lot about the applicant as to how well they are established here
E) Tax filing info also perhaps plays a signifcant role in the vetting process.

Eventually as long as applicants meet the requirements there are no grounds for concern but just to understand how we fit would perhaps give us a fair idea of how this works and perhaps alleviate concerns on delays. I would say it would be good to have a conversation about this but by no reasons allow this to make us impatient and assume things.

Please share your opinions.

 

[wolfpack27616]

Didn't realise they check credit scores or that it was even a criterion in the first place!

 

[cnccnc]

Didn't realise they check credit scores or that it was even a criterion in the first place!

No certainly there is no such criterion the conversation is about the contributing factors that may affect processing times.

 

[spyfy]

Hi all applicants

Apparently we can all see processing times (getting a test invite and oath ceremony) for all applicants vary from a few months to several months and in some cases continues to be under process. So clearly there maybe some considering factors in case of each applicant that affects the processing time rather than a more incredible assumption of "agent laziness" as suggested is some threads. Viewing some timelines clearly rules out "number of stay days" as a considering factor (as long as they meet the requirement), so wonder what these considering factors maybe, perhaps the people who have already received their oath dates may consider sharing some info but in my opinion there maybe factors such as:
A) Security screening,
B) Current job status,
C) Ability to demonstrate strong ties to Canada,
D) Credit scores,
E) Tax filing info
and so on...
So for e.g. considering A) Applicants that have received FP requests seem to have longer processing times,
Considering B) Perhaps applicants in good long term contracts seem to have faster processing times, with self employed and the unemployed being the most vetted,
Considering C) Perhaps the likeliness of applicants continuing to live in Canada could be a consideration although this is a not a requirement but an applicant demonstrating stronger ties would allow an agent to give perhaps more points to someone with less stronger ties and so on.
Considering D) Credit scores do tell a lot about the applicant as to how well they are established here
E) Tax filing info also perhaps plays a signifcant role in the vetting process.

Eventually as long as applicants meet the requirements there are no grounds for concern but just to understand how we fit would perhaps give us a fair idea of how this works and perhaps alleviate concerns on delays. I would say it would be good to have a conversation about this but by no reasons allow this to make us impatient and assume things.

Please share your opinions.

You will not get anything productive out of this thread. This is like thread number 100 about wild guessing regarding processing time disparity reasons. Just use the forum search, no need to reinvent the wheel every month

 

[yanesrahn]

I would add other factors like, Country of origen, multiples country leaving, single or family application, travelling history, application office, month of application, summer slow workforce (vacation time) and more.. Good luck.. mud of the officer, etc..

 

[itsmyid]

You will not get anything productive out of this thread. This is like thread number 100 about wild guessing regarding processing time disparity reasons. Just use the forum search, no need to reinvent the wheel every month

Not to mention it basically achieves nothing ... let’s say there would be enough input to come up with some meaningful statistics and ‘crack the code’ on how IRCC processing time works , but then what? All the factors are already pre-determined and there’s nothing the applicants can go back in time to undo in order to get faster processing

 

[FloydCan]

In simple terms, if you want fast processing move to the West or Ottawa.

 

[crozy]

I'm an October applicant who is still in process. I know quite a few people who applied from my area with similar background who are citizens now.

Here is my situation as per your theory.

A) Security Clearance, I have no idea. I never had an issue with the law but grew up in a middle eastern country that isn't really associated with security concerns.

I know at least 2 people who applied from my country after me who are citizens now.

B) Employed in one of the most iconic Canadian Companies. I have a stable job and can work in this company for 30+ years if I want to.

The two applicants i mentioned above who are from my home country, neither of them are employed. They both graduated university last year and are still looking for work.

C) It sounds like a very subjective criteria but here goes: I moved here 6 years ago, went to university here, filled my taxes every year. Employed here. I only visit home country once a year for 1-2 weeks max. Don't know how else I'd show strong ties.

D) Credit Score fluctuates from high 700s to low 800s. I don't see a problem here.

E) Mentioned above, all my taxes even before the time I became a PR were filled out on deadline.

Conclusion: I might be an outlier or suffering from the "lazy agent syndrome" but your theory doesn't really explain what's going on with my application.

 

[dpenabill]

So long as the process is ROUTINE, or even non-routine but non-routine ONLY because of something which in itself does not tend to push the application into a separate processing track (FP requests; PPQ-QAE; simple, technical requests for particular information or documentation), the variations in the timeline do indeed vary considerably AND clearly the factors include incidental circumstances (perhaps the responsible processing agent takes a holiday just before the application is next in the queue, just one example among scores; or there are other internal causes for slower processing for a time in the applicable local office, just one other example among scores of additional others) totally beyond the applicant's VIEW let alone control. And even factors which might be in the applicant's control, as others have observed, most of those are established, fixed, as of when the applicant makes the application, so it is not as if there is any useful information to be mined about this . . . especially since just how or to what extent any such factors will affect the timeline is well beyond what can practically be discerned from the minimal sample available for the forum to analyze.

Even the effort to discern factors which elevate the RISK of non-routine processing, which tends to cause significantly longer timelines, are difficult to identify EXCEPT the more or less obvious ones, which are addressed at length in numerous topics and which are tied to particular issues. Examples: (1) Most FP requests are relatively close to being routine, but some relate to criminality or security concerns specific to the individual applicant, which the individual applicant really should be aware of anyway. (2) Applicant relies on passport stamps in reporting travel history in presence calculation and thus fails to report one or more trips or inaccurately reports travel dates (common error is to rely on stamp showing entry date into another country as date of exit from Canada, which is often OFF by a day or two, especially for trans-Pacific trips), and in doing this makes enough errors to trigger non-routine RQ related processing.

BUT apart from the obvious examples, apart from the circumstances the applicant should easily be aware of, it is very difficult to forecast if and when, or why, the application is subject to some non-routine step. Note, in this regard, it is readily apparent that applications are sometimes diverted for an inquiry or process that is somewhat outside the routine track WITH NO NOTICE to the applicant, no sign the applicant can discern, and if there is no problem the application resumes its place in the routine track, just a bit behind some others in the timeline.


WHAT INFORMATION OR SOURCES OF INFORMATION DOES IRCC CONSIDER?

(The main reason I am responding to this thread.)

in my opinion there maybe factors such as:
D) Credit scores,

Didn't realise they check credit scores or that it was even a criterion in the first place!

No certainly there is no such criterion . . .

I do not have a clue whether IRCC accesses and considers an applicant's credit scores or information otherwise related to an applicant's credit. It is possible. Would not surprise me in the least.

Note, for example, IRCC can and does, at least for some applicants, access open source information, especially such information on the Internet. For example, LinkedIn (an applicant's account and possibly for accounts in other names which IRCC might apprehend the applicant could have used) is perhaps the most well-known source of information on the Internet that IRCC is known to examine and consider.

It makes no difference that the applicant's credit is NOT among the criteria which affects eligibility for citizenship. IRCC can and will examine and consider a lot of information that is NOT directly related to the citizenship eligibility requirements. Work history is the most obvious. There is NO requirement that a PR be employed to be eligible for citizenship. BUT given that work history tends to illuminate a lot about where a PR was located at particular times, this information is so important to IRCC that it requires applicants to give their complete work history for the FIVE years preceding the application IN the APPLICATION itself.

The scope of what IRCC will search and consider undoubtedly varies considerably from one applicant to another. The scope is probably far larger than many imagine. And, indeed, some such inquiries may be the cause of a somewhat longer timeline for this or that applicant, with little or nothing to indicate to the applicant that any such inquiry has been made let alone added time to his or her timeline. Not likely such things will show up in an applicant's ATIP requested version of a GCMS report.

IN ANY EVENT, apart from the big and obvious items (such as readily recognized triggers for RQ, an arrest record even if the case was dismissed, among others), efforts to map particular circumstances to routine processing timelines, and especially so if this is done to forecast timelines for individual applicants, are akin to visiting a fortune teller on Dundas or otherwise reading tea leaves, perhaps akin to reading tea leaves in the dark.

 

[Joshua1]

This is a moot point thread!

 

[sns204]

I agree with all in that this is a pointless thread, but just for the sake of not scaring others reading it, you can be unemployed and have horrible credit and still get your citizenship. They won't be factors. At all.

 

[itsmyid]

I agree with all in that this is a pointless thread, but just for the sake of not scaring others reading it, you can be unemployed and have horrible credit and still get your citizenship. They won't be factors. At all.

And one can have been fully employed with great credit score but still stuck at waiting for test invite after 11 months - that’s a fact I know from personal experience lol

 

[hardnut]

So long as the process is ROUTINE, or even non-routine but non-routine ONLY because of something which in itself does not tend to push the application into a separate processing track (FP requests; PPQ-QAE; simple, technical requests for particular information or documentation), the variations in the timeline do indeed vary considerably AND clearly the factors include incidental circumstances (perhaps the responsible processing agent takes a holiday just before the application is next in the queue, just one example among scores; or there are other internal causes for slower processing for a time in the applicable local office, just one other example among scores of additional others) totally beyond the applicant's VIEW let alone control. And even factors which might be in the applicant's control, as others have observed, most of those are established, fixed, as of when the applicant makes the application, so it is not as if there is any useful information to be mined about this . . . especially since just how or to what extent any such factors will affect the timeline is well beyond what can practically be discerned from the minimal sample available for the forum to analyze.

Even the effort to discern factors which elevate the RISK of non-routine processing, which tends to cause significantly longer timelines, are difficult to identify EXCEPT the more or less obvious ones, which are addressed at length in numerous topics and which are tied to particular issues. Examples: (1) Most FP requests are relatively close to being routine, but some relate to criminality or security concerns specific to the individual applicant, which the individual applicant really should be aware of anyway. (2) Applicant relies on passport stamps in reporting travel history in presence calculation and thus fails to report one or more trips or inaccurately reports travel dates (common error is to rely on stamp showing entry date into another country as date of exit from Canada, which is often OFF by a day or two, especially for trans-Pacific trips), and in doing this makes enough errors to trigger non-routine RQ related processing.

BUT apart from the obvious examples, apart from the circumstances the applicant should easily be aware of, it is very difficult to forecast if and when, or why, the application is subject to some non-routine step. Note, in this regard, it is readily apparent that applications are sometimes diverted for an inquiry or process that is somewhat outside the routine track WITH NO NOTICE to the applicant, no sign the applicant can discern, and if there is no problem the application resumes its place in the routine track, just a bit behind some others in the timeline.


WHAT INFORMATION OR SOURCES OF INFORMATION DOES IRCC CONSIDER?

(The main reason I am responding to this thread.)







I do not have a clue whether IRCC accesses and considers an applicant's credit scores or information otherwise related to an applicant's credit. It is possible. Would not surprise me in the least.

Note, for example, IRCC can and does, at least for some applicants, access open source information, especially such information on the Internet. For example, LinkedIn (an applicant's account and possibly for accounts in other names which IRCC might apprehend the applicant could have used) is perhaps the most well-known source of information on the Internet that IRCC is known to examine and consider.

It makes no difference that the applicant's credit is NOT among the criteria which affects eligibility for citizenship. IRCC can and will examine and consider a lot of information that is NOT directly related to the citizenship eligibility requirements. Work history is the most obvious. There is NO requirement that a PR be employed to be eligible for citizenship. BUT given that work history tends to illuminate a lot about where a PR was located at particular times, this information is so important to IRCC that it requires applicants to give their complete work history for the FIVE years preceding the application IN the APPLICATION itself.

The scope of what IRCC will search and consider undoubtedly varies considerably from one applicant to another. The scope is probably far larger than many imagine. And, indeed, some such inquiries may be the cause of a somewhat longer timeline for this or that applicant, with little or nothing to indicate to the applicant that any such inquiry has been made let alone added time to his or her timeline. Not likely such things will show up in an applicant's ATIP requested version of a GCMS report.

IN ANY EVENT, apart from the big and obvious items (such as readily recognized triggers for RQ, an arrest record even if the case was dismissed, among others), efforts to map particular circumstances to routine processing timelines, and especially so if this is done to forecast timelines for individual applicants, are akin to visiting a fortune teller on Dundas or otherwise reading tea leaves, perhaps akin to reading tea leaves in the dark.

Mr dpenabill, I mean no offence to you , sir. And we all improve on feedbacks; Your posts, though informative in places , are extremely long drawn ; could use some trimming of "word- bushes".