While this response is a bit late, the underlying physical presence and
*buffer* issues are a salient subject being recently discussed in multiple threads, including a discussion today in a new thread titled "
Stuck in Physical Presence." I will try to coordinate responses (I am very slow these days, so it may take some time).
This post is mostly about buffers.
In addition to what I discuss below about buffers, in particular, it is important to keep in mind that physical presence (
PP) is a factual issue which in many cases will vary considerably from one applicant to another, the particular factual details in the specific case looming very large in how things go. Sometimes (but not always)
PP is dominated by the numbers, which in turn are often (but again NOT always) dominated by
exit-to-next-entry dates (or the other side of that coin, the
entry-to-next-exit dates). In some cases documentation (evidence or proof) of actual physical presence can be a big factor apart from the numbers; that is, the strength of the
evidence showing actual presence in-between a known date of entry and the next known date of exit can be an important part of the
PP determination. (There is a reason why the citizenship application requires a complete accounting of address and activity/work history apart from travel history.)
Another note: there have been fewer and fewer anecdotal reports of applicants getting RQ'd; that is, it appears fewer applicant are being asked to submit information in a Residence Questionnaire with supporting documentation. Hard to know, but it appears that in more cases IRCC is conducting more extensive background checks itself, or by referral to CBSA, to verify
PP, rather than issue RQ.
Since you applied with just 1096 days, it's quite possible your application has gone for secondary review which tends to create delays in processing. Not much you can do but wait.
Yea I figured the review was gonna happen. It's either wait a month before applying, or apply now and add a month-ish to processing time. So I figured it was the same. I am just surprise they have not contacted me for proof/travel docs, stamps or interviews. Scoping out the web board, I see people were asked for interviews and for passport stamps pretty early in the process, so I was surprised I was not invited that's all.
All my travels were via air, so I assume it will be all in the CBSA report they have anyways. Maybe it's just needing another set of eyes or two before approval.
I think they are just doing additional checks, because from what I see in other posts you get call into interview if you missed a trip. So the fact that we didn't get call for interviews is a good sign. Though it's kinda annoying you are still penalized for not having a buffer even though you kept your own good records.
There is no penalty for not having a buffer.
Applying with a buffer has some advantages, ranging from reducing the risk of extra or "
nonroutine" processing resulting in longer processing times (from several months to many months, or even longer) to reducing the risk of negative outcomes.
Re How Much Buffer Generally: Many in this forum who encourage applying with a buffer suggest a week to ten days extra. More buffer than that is prudent in my view; a buffer of at least a month is probably OK for most applicants but some may want to consider significantly more buffer than that. How much buffer is a very personal question, how much depending on the individual's personal situation and history. For example: due to personal circumstances related to self-employment, and applying when just being self-employed greatly increased the risk of RQ, I waited to apply a full year after passing the physical presence threshold.
Re Impact of Non-routine Processing: The impact of any additional inquiries, investigations, or other non-routine processing, is not limited to how long it takes to do whatever additional tasks are involved. It is NOT about adding just a month to the processing time. The biggest impact on the processing time is how long an application sits in a queue before the next step is taken. For a task that literally takes just a half hour of a processing agent's time, the application can sit waiting in a queue for weeks or months, maybe several months, before a processing agent does that task. If there is a referral for additional inquiries, let alone a referral to CBSA for investigation, that can easily add many months or longer to the processing time, months during which the application is just sitting in a queue waiting for an agent to deal with it.
Reducing Risks Related To Error or Omission:
The most important advantage in having a buffer is reducing risks related to an error or omission that could affect whether the applicant has sufficiently established/proven they met (as of the day the application was made) the physical presence requirement. Applicants who keep meticulous records and are exceedingly careful can otherwise limit (perhaps eliminate entirely) the risk they made such an error or omission. That said, we all make mistakes. Many, it seems, make the mistake of being certain they made no mistakes.
This seems to be the main reason IRCC and many here encourage applicants wait to apply with a buffer. If the applicant makes a mistake that results in falling just one day short, that will result in that application being denied.
If, as is claimed here, the travel history the applicant reported in the application had no errors or omissions, there is a very low risk of this. This seems to tempt many, those who are fully confident in the completeness and accuracy of their travel history, to apply with little buffer (less than ten days even).
An applicant's certainty, however, does not guarantee there will be no mistakes or errors on IRCC's end, or in CBSA records. The risk of IRCC or CBSA mistakes is low, probably very low. But of course IRCC sometimes makes mistakes, so there is still some risk of an error. If there is an error at IRCC's end, the applicant will have an opportunity to challenge and correct those, and even if IRCC does not agree with the applicant, the applicant would then have an opportunity to present their case to an independent Citizenship Judge. Be aware, however, this would not only be non-routine processing adding several months to the processing time, but contested cases appear to still take longer than a year, some two years, some longer.
If the applicant applied with enough buffer to offset the IRCC mistake, however, odds are good the application sails through without any non-routine processing, no delays.
The Other Big Advantage From a Buffer; Reduced Risk of RQ-related Non-routine Processing:
The other big advantage is a buffer helps to increase the odds (but does not guarantee) a total stranger bureaucrat is persuaded the applicant met the physical presence requirement without needing to make any additional inquiries.
It is likely that for the majority of citizenship applications there is little or no question about the applicant's
PP. No need to make additional inquiries let alone conduct an investigation. Cross-checking the applicant's travel history, address history, work history, and immigration history, with other readily considered information, including CBSA travel history, is sufficient to make a positive
PP determination. No
PP concerns.
PP readily verified. In such cases (probably most cases, perhaps even the vast majority of cases) the application proceeds with no non-routine processing delays.
What can trigger
PP questions or concerns is a huge subject. I alone have probably written many thousands of words about that subject over the course of the last decade and a half. We know a lot of historical factors, and most of these are quite likely to still be influential. Applicant errors (inconsistencies, discrepancies, omissions, and so on), for example, have always been and almost certainly will continue to be among the biggest factors. An omission in travel history, in particular, significantly increases the risk of RQ-related non-routine processing.
There are far, far too many variables to try enumerating even the most significant ones here.
More to the point, we also know a number of factors that can help reduce the risk there will be
PP questions or concerns triggering RQ-related non-routine processing. Near the top of the list, in addition to being as complete and accurate as possible, is waiting to apply with a good, solid buffer. A good buffer in conjunction with a complete and accurate travel history, supported by solid address and work history, can go a long way toward avoiding
PP questions or concerns, thereby avoiding RQ-related non-routine processing, avoiding potential delays for many months or a year even.
