Also, guys, did not you try your MP? I know he/she cannot speed up the process but sometimes the request from MP makes the clerk take out your file from the pile and look into it. 
Email from CIC that PR card renewal needs secondary review
- Thread starter Pual Newman
- Start date
Absolutely not necessary. It could be written : File is in queue dated 22 Feb 2017 (whatever day)
Request CAIPS (if you are in Canada)
Why did you do that? To get more days in Canada? Do they care that much if it is 863 days or 1100+ days?
One question is whether or not you might be examined at the PoE, when next entering Canada, regarding your compliance with the PR Residency Obligation. If you do not have a valid PR card, the prospect of being examined is elevated. Since you have a PR card application in Secondary Review, there is also a strong possibility you are flagged for possible PR RO issues in FOSS.
You cannot be denied entry. You may be reported if it is determined you are in breach of the PR RO (this will be based on how much you have been in Canada during the five years immediately preceding that day, the day you are entering Canada and being examined). If Reported, that will most likely be followed by a Departure Order. That is not immediately enforceable, so you would still be allowed to enter Canada. You would have 30 days to make an appeal if that happens.
The biggest factor in whether you will face a PR RO compliance interview at the PoE is simply how much time you have been in Canada. Obviously, falling short is problematic. But, almost as obvious, cutting-it-close also has serious risks.
Note: to some extent these requests are also testing whether the PR is currently in Canada. Just a timely mostly responsive submission can make a big positive difference.
PR Card application and Secondary Review:
Here too, obviously one of the key aspects of this has to do with whether or not you are in compliance with the PR Residency Obligation. And, likewise, falling short is problematic. But, almost as obvious, cutting-it-close also has serious risks. Indeed, if it appears you have not fully and permanently settled in Canada, not only can you anticipate elevated scrutiny but there is a strong likelihood of skepticism in the assessment of your declarations.
And indeed, the requests you have received indicate a significant degree of IRCC's skepticism as to what you have reported.
How this goes depends in large part on how much time you have spent in Canada (the more the better), how much you can document the time you spent in Canada (Canadian work history, residence history, collateral documentation of activity in Canada, and so on), and as the request highlights, the extent to which you can document your travel history.
Leading to . . .
Travel history from other countries:
Do what you can to submit as much as you can within the time specified. To some extent, most of these requests include boilerplate and are not necessarily designed to address the particulars in the individual's case. So your travel documents plus a U.S. report (how to obtain travel history from the U.S., and to some extent other countries, is discussed more in the citizenship forum . . . I have not kept up on that process) might suffice. To the extent you can, in a sense, bookend all travel within dates you can firmly document, that should help. Thus, for example, if all the evidence of travel you have clearly falls within dates you left Canada to enter the U.S. and before next entry into Canada, you could add a supplemental page explaining this.
The extent to which the U.S. records will suffice might depend on the extent to which you have traveled elsewhere. I would not worry much about travel within Europe. My sense is your passport should probably document arrivals in Europe from the U.S., and departures to destinations outside Europe; so documenting those trips (however you can, at the least with the passport pages with stamps showing this much) and explaining these bookend all your other travel within Europe, should suffice.
Remember, however, that documentation of travel dates might not be enough proof. This looms more as a factor if you have not been settled and living and working in Canada. If IRCC is not satisfied with what you submit, you could be challenged to provide actual proof of time in Canada in-between travel dates. Work history in Canada. Lease or rental or ownership of a residence in Canada. Other activity in Canada, from attending school to doctor's visits.
And now this . . . traveling to Europe in June:
PRs with PRC applications in Secondary are, generally, wise to carefully consider their options and their risks relative to traveling abroad.
There is no one-size-fits-all guideline about this. The nature and scope of risks are very much case-specific. Here again, the extent of compliance with the PR RO looms large, recognizing, again, that cutting-it-close inherently entails risks. And that for a PR who has not been fully settled and living permanently in Canada, the risks tend to be higher.
A U.S. citizen can board a flight to Canada without displaying a PR card. And of course a U.S. citizen can travel to the U.S. and then travel by car to the Canadian border in any event. And as noted above, a PR cannot be denied entry at the border but can be examined and if determined to be in breach of the PR RO, Reported and issued a Departure Order.
How you proceed from here is very much a personal, individual decision, and in addition to depending on the particulars of your situation (relative to PR RO compliance especially), what you decide to do should carefully take into consideration your personal priorities and your personal approach to risks (through middle-age and a bit beyond, I tended to take a lot of risks; that was a long time ago; now I tend to lean heavily toward caution).
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
Yes.
There is no CIC now. It is IRCC.
IRCC telephone representatives will first provide FAQ type answers. If a client succeeds in getting the tel-rep to access the client's personal records and talk about what is in the records, that will be access via GCMS (Global Case Management System), the version accessible to tel-reps thus not necessarily all relevant information for the client in the GCMS.
Not sure what you mean by "care much," recognizing that the decision-making is fact-based, criteria driven. No emotive elements.
If the question is whether 863 days versus 1100+ days makes any difference, that too depends on what is meant.
If, for example, the officer making a Residency Determination concludes the PR was present in Canada for 863 days within the relevant time period, that supports the conclusion the PR complied with the PR RO just as much as it would if it was determined the PR was in Canada 1100 days. Indeed, if the officer concludes 730 days presence within the preceding five years, that meets the PR RO just as well.
But if the question is about the weight of evidence, obviously reporting 863 days indicates the PR was outside Canada more than the PR was inside Canada, suggesting that the PR may not have fully and permanently settled in Canada, thus at least inviting questions about whether the PR may have been outside Canada more than reported. Remember, for any time period there might be any question about where the PR was, the reasonable inference is that a person is more likely to have been where that person was most of the time. So for the PR who was outside Canada more than in Canada, if there is any concern about some periods of time, reason pushes a decision-maker toward doubting the PR was in Canada during that time (that is, toward inferring the PR was outside Canada).
That said, beyond at least reporting the minimum, 730 days (since that much is necessary), beyond that the total number of days reported probably is less important, in terms of the weight given in assessing compliance with the PR RO, than a lot of other factors. The big ones include whether or not the PR appears to be credible, and appears to have fully and permanently settled in Canada.
Like many factors which can influence how things go, there is no requirement that the PR be fully and permanently settled in Canada, but this can nonetheless have a huge impact on how skeptical IRCC approaches the PR and the PR's declarations.
Other looming factors include any aspect of the PR or the PR's history which might compromise the PR's credibility. There is no requirement that a PR be perfectly credible. But here too, if IRCC perceives any reason to question, let alone doubt, the PR's credibility, that can be a serious problem.
Likewise deserving to keep PR status. No technical requirement says a PR needs to do anything to deserve keeping PR status. But if it appears the PR is exploiting or manipulating the system, has no intent to settle permanently in Canada for example, it would be a huge mistake to overlook how detrimentally this can affect things.
I know this but in conversation on forum that does not matter.
Your thoughts are interesting, thank you for sharing, and I totally agree with you but my question was more precise I would say. I was interested in that particular case when a person with 863 day within 5 year period got into secondary and then after withdrawal the application and applying again got his PR almost immediately. It looks like nothing has changed with anything in his case except the amount of days of presence.
However, now after your answer, I am even more interested if something has changed in his life during that period (from withdrawal till application) besides 863 days vs. 1100 days. Like let's say he started working vs. not working before? Could this ONE thing (and additional 237 days
) make such a difference? If that the case could it be reasonable just to send a proof of working to IRCC ( ) instead of withdrawal?Your answer about CAIPS (GCMS) was interesting too. So CAIPS does not give an applicant everything that is in his file.
Last edited:
One of the requests in my review is for:
Personal immigration entry/exit record or movement certificate issued by the countries where you have travelled
Is this in addition to passport stamps? For example, if I have passport stamps noting my entry and exit, does this request still need to be made to the given country? Most of the time, I find that only US and Canada sparsely stamp passports, but my records from other countries are fairly consistent within my passports.
Personal immigration entry/exit record or movement certificate issued by the countries where you have travelled
Is this in addition to passport stamps? For example, if I have passport stamps noting my entry and exit, does this request still need to be made to the given country? Most of the time, I find that only US and Canada sparsely stamp passports, but my records from other countries are fairly consistent within my passports.
This is probably as broad and sweeping as it appears, requesting such records from all countries in which you have traveled. That's the request. If possible, of course you should comply with the request and submit those records. But that is probably not feasible, perhaps not even possible.
Most important thing is to:
-- at least submit copy of ALL pages of ALL possibly relevant travel documents
-- make a concerted effort to obtain travel records from
-- -- home country,
-- -- any country in which you have been living or working during the past five years,
-- -- any country for which you have had status to live or work in the last five years
-- -- and, since you indicate all your travels outside Canada involved transit through the U.S., the U.S. records
Other than the U.S. records, which given the extent to which your travels are all, apparently, through the U.S., those are important to get and should not be too difficult to obtain, my sense (I am no expert) is that above list is otherwise in order of importance.
As I previously noted, there is a lot more discussion about obtaining travel records from the U.S. and other countries in the citizenship conference, acknowledging you may have to scroll back through some older pages to find the relevant topics.
But as otherwise discussed, for many countries obtaining such records can range from difficult and slow to virtually impossible. So you make a good effort to get what you can, be sure to submit what you can within the time provided, acknowledge what you cannot include in your response and explain what efforts you have made to obtain those records.
As I previously observed, you could also include an explanation that groups or organizes your travels, to essentially map which countries you traveled to in the course of specific trips which started and ended in one destination, or if applicable, were visited in transit to a particular destination. How you do this depends on your particular travel history and situation.
Perhaps it should be emphasized how much difference your particular circumstances can make, which is a lot.
How much effort you need to put into your response likely depends on the strength of your compliance with the PR Residency Obligation.
If you are fully and permanently settled in Canada, working in Canada, and are not cutting-it-close relative to compliance with the PR Residency Obligation, responding in a way that some might call substantial performance (as opposed to full or complete performance), including copy of all pages of all potentially relevant Travel Documents, should readily suffice.
In contrast, if you are not currently fully and permanently settled in Canada (for at least some substantial period of time), OR if a significant part of your employment or income is based abroad, OR you are cutting-it-close relative to compliance with the PR Residency Obligation, and particularly if you are in breach of the PR RO, you probably need to make a more dedicated effort to respond as best you can to the request . . . and you may want to consult with or even obtain the representation of an experienced, licensed immigration lawyer.
So far as I have seen, you have not revealed much about the underlying circumstances. Those really make a difference, a big difference. And this is especially so if you go abroad again. No need to reveal more here. Mostly this is a heads up about how much difference those can make.
By the way: I do not mean to cause panic or undue worry. I really cannot guess whether the request to you is essentially perfunctory quality control, for which even a nominal response (including at least copy of all pages of all possibly relevant travel documents, and otherwise confirming your current residence in Canada) will suffice, or is at the other extreme signalling suspicion and skeptical scrutiny for which you may need to step up your game considerably, or something in-between. You know your background, your facts, your situation, and thus you should have a good idea whether this is more or less serious. And you should respond accordingly, using your own best judgment.
No one here can tell you how to best approach this. All we can do is outline and highlight some information which should help you determine, for yourself, what you should do . . . and if you are aware of circumstances suggesting the prospect of problems, perhaps see a qualified immigration lawyer for assistance.
pr card is sent for secondary review in december 2016, i ordered case specific detailsCAIPS NOTES
it shows in comments at bottom that
"case received at Hamilton IRcc for GOA PRD TRIAGE PHASE 2".
can anyone tell me what does it mean and how much time it takes..
thanks
it shows in comments at bottom that
"case received at Hamilton IRcc for GOA PRD TRIAGE PHASE 2".
can anyone tell me what does it mean and how much time it takes..
thanks
From what I know,there are two Phase 2 situation , check this out.
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/manuals/bulletins/2013/ob536.asp
Thanks Mat..
Is there anyone who has went into secondary review in December 2016 and still waiting.. please share
Hello, guys.
Today I received the following email message for CIC:
RE: Application for a Permanent Resident (PR) Card
This refers to the application for a permanent resident card that you filed with this office. The purpose of this letter is to advise you that following a review of your application, it has been necessary to refer your application to the local Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada office. We regret to advise you that this referral will result in additional delay. You will be contacted by the local office if additional information or documents are required to complete your file.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-Application received on Jan 2016
- Application sent to secondary review March 2016
Can anyone here tell me what does that mean?
Today I received the following email message for CIC:
RE: Application for a Permanent Resident (PR) Card
This refers to the application for a permanent resident card that you filed with this office. The purpose of this letter is to advise you that following a review of your application, it has been necessary to refer your application to the local Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada office. We regret to advise you that this referral will result in additional delay. You will be contacted by the local office if additional information or documents are required to complete your file.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-Application received on Jan 2016
- Application sent to secondary review March 2016
Can anyone here tell me what does that mean?
No guarantee what the local office processing is at this stage, although the usual suspects would be a Residency Determination or to schedule an in person interview or to conduct local investigation.
As for the Residency Determination, a number of participants in this forum tend to overlook that the Secondary Review is not focused on the Residency Determination (verifying compliance with the PR Residency Obligation), largely because one of the most common contributing factors leading to SR is a PR RO issue, at the least cutting-it-close or IRCC's perception the PR is outside Canada (and possibly in breach of the PR RO). Thus, a referral to the local office for a Residency Determination seems the more likely (but not only) next step. That noted, it is apparent that many SR cases are resolved, including a positive Residency Determination, without a referral to the local office for further processing . . . or at least no more than sending the PR card to the local office to arrange an in-person pick-up.
It is possible that the latter is among the possibilities here, even though I do not recall seeing anecdotal reports of this notice before in this situation . . . usually the PR's eCas shows the PR card issued and then there is a notice from the local office for an in-person pick-up (where PR card is not mailed to the PR).
If you have been in Canada in the meantime, and you were in compliance with the PR RO at the time you made the PRC application, probably no big deal, no need to worry. IRCC may only be making sure you are indeed in Canada.