Lost PR card and beiing asked humanitarian and compassionate considerations for residency requirement

[viveksharmaz]

Hi All,
I have a different situation and need some expert advice .. I was in USA when I got PR in 2021 July and moved to Canada in August 2024. I been working in USA and have been tarveling to and fro from canada to USA since Aug 2024. I have recently brought a home in 2025 .. and My original PR card was valid till Sep 2026 and unfortunetly I lost my PR card in Dec 2025 and applied for a new PR card and I got this below email where they are asking me to provide below documents along with ..

""you are being asked to provide proof of your compliance with the residency obligation for the period of 2021/07/02 up to the present day, as well as any humanitarian and compassionate considerations. Please submit the following documents:



q All passports and travel documents held by you, used to enter or leave Canada or other countries since 2021/07/02, whether valid or expired.

q A complete and detailed list of your absences from Canada since 2021/07/02.

q Record of Landing / Confirmation of Permanent Residence.

q Photo identification.

q Any documentary proof of your establishment and ties in Canada such as employment. This may include:

q Employment records (for example T-4’s, employment letters and other work records).

q Schooling/training records (for example reports cards, diplomas, awards).

q Social and community involvement (for example proof of any community involvement, volunteer duties).

q Medical records (for example proof of hospitalization, medical appointments).

q Home/family ties (for example rental and mortgage documents, whereabouts of family members).

q Supporting documents showing that there are compelling and compassionate factors in your personal circumstances that justify keeping your permanent resident status.

I am not sure how I can provide the any humanitarian and compassionate considerations along with
Supporting documents showing that there are compelling and compassionate factors in your personal circumstances that justify keeping your permanent resident status.

I really need help to reply to IRCC with above quetsions. Anyone has faced the similar issue.

 

[Buletruck]

Hi All,
I have a different situation and need some expert advice .. I was in USA when I got PR in 2021 July and moved to Canada in August 2024. I been working in USA and have been tarveling to and fro from canada to USA since Aug 2024. I have recently brought a home in 2025 .. and My original PR card was valid till Sep 2026 and unfortunetly I lost my PR card in Dec 2025 and applied for a new PR card and I got this below email where they are asking me to provide below documents along with ..

""you are being asked to provide proof of your compliance with the residency obligation for the period of 2021/07/02 up to the present day, as well as any humanitarian and compassionate considerations. Please submit the following documents:



q All passports and travel documents held by you, used to enter or leave Canada or other countries since 2021/07/02, whether valid or expired.

q A complete and detailed list of your absences from Canada since 2021/07/02.

q Record of Landing / Confirmation of Permanent Residence.

q Photo identification.

q Any documentary proof of your establishment and ties in Canada such as employment. This may include:

q Employment records (for example T-4’s, employment letters and other work records).

q Schooling/training records (for example reports cards, diplomas, awards).

q Social and community involvement (for example proof of any community involvement, volunteer duties).

q Medical records (for example proof of hospitalization, medical appointments).

q Home/family ties (for example rental and mortgage documents, whereabouts of family members).

q Supporting documents showing that there are compelling and compassionate factors in your personal circumstances that justify keeping your permanent resident status.

I am not sure how I can provide the any humanitarian and compassionate considerations along with
Supporting documents showing that there are compelling and compassionate factors in your personal circumstances that justify keeping your permanent resident status.

I really need help to reply to IRCC with above quetsions. Anyone has faced the similar issue.

Lawyer up. Looks like IRCC has decided you won't be able to meet your residency obligation by July 2026 (looks like you are about a month short) and are giving you the chance to submit a compelling reason (illness, family issues, something) that prevented you from meeting that obligation. If you delayed moving to Canada for no particular reason, then it seems they are preparing to strip you of your PR status. As I said, now's the time to engage a talented immigration lawyer (not a consultant).

 

[viveksharmaz]

I lost my PR card , so I had applied for a new PR card. I know I dont meet the residency but I just need a new PR card and I continue to live here in Canada. My Daughter goes to school here and My wife is also woring here now. Do you know anyone with similar case and which Immigration lawyer they used that will be greatly helpful.

 

[Buletruck]

I lost my PR card , so I had applied for a new PR card. I know I dont meet the residency but I just need a new PR card and I continue to live here in Canada. My Daughter goes to school here and My wife is also woring here now. Do you know anyone with similar case and which Immigration lawyer they used that will be greatly helpful.

Well, you basically broke the cardinal rule for those who know, or even think, they aren't in compliance.....you interacted with IRCC (and seemingly CBSA on a regular basis) before you met RO. You took a calculated risk on the RO and it backfired. Applying for a new/replacement PR card within the renewal window (or pretty close to it) triggered a residency review. The good news is this has no effect on your daughter or wife, assuming they don't make a similar mistake before meeting the residency obligation. And assuming your wife doesn't make similarly bad calculations, should you loose your PR status, she can always sponsor you again (again, she shouldn't interact with CBSA or IRCC until she meets RO). As for lawyers, the forum sponsor does immigration law, so you might start there.

 

[dpenabill]

.

I have a different situation and need some expert advice .. I was in USA when I got PR in 2021 July and moved to Canada in August 2024. I been working in USA and have been tarveling to and fro from canada to USA since Aug 2024. I have recently brought a home in 2025 .. and My original PR card was valid till Sep 2026 and unfortunetly I lost my PR card in Dec 2025 and applied for a new PR card and I got this below email where they are asking me to provide below documents along with ..

Foremost: This is not a venue for obtaining "expert advice." For expert advice see a lawyer, a reputable and experienced immigration lawyer.

That could be expensive. A thorough consultation might suffice but even that is likely to cost many hundreds of dollars. Free consultations are worth no more than what you pay for.

At minimum, a worthwhile consultation needs to include the lawyer considering the particulars of your situation, in detail, including the information and documentation you gather to respond to this request from IRCC (yes, if you go to a lawyer do your best to prepare your response BEFORE meeting with the lawyer so the lawyer has that information to work with) and including copies of your PR card application and what you submitted with that.

Otherwise you need to submit the information and documentation IRCC has requested, on time and doing the best you can.

For the short term what you need is mostly advice from an experienced immigration lawyer about how to best present H&C information in this process. More regarding this below.

A big factor is whether or not a 44(1) Report has been prepared already.

Hard to say whether that has happened, whether this request for information and documentation is . . .

-- giving you an opportunity to provide more information and documentation than what you submitted with the PR card application, so that an officer can determine whether to issue a PR card or prepare a 44(1) Report for inadmissibility, OR​

-- asking for this information to be considered in a review of an already prepared 44(1) Report, a review by an officer acting in the role of a Minister's Delegate​

I agree with @Buletruck this mostly looks like the first, an opportunity to present H&C related information which if sufficient will mean you will be issued a five year PR card, no Report prepared.

But that is not at all for sure. And it matters. If no Report has yet been prepared, for the days you are in Canada you are still getting credit toward meeting the RO. If a Report has already been prepared, you will not get RO credit for any days after the date the Report was prepared.

Leading to a big factor in the H&C assessment: just how much in breach of the RO you are.

looks like you are about a month short

Based on the information you have provided, that looks like the very best case. But of course any full days you have spent in the U.S. (or otherwise not in Canada) since moving here in August 2024 will make you shorter, that many more days short.

And, as I noted, if a 44(1) Report has already been prepared, you get no RO credit for any days in Canada since that. If a Report has already been prepared that would mean you are at least six to eight months short.

Note: The calculation can be confusing. If no Report has been prepared, you get RO credit for all days you have been in Canada since landing PLUS all days between now and the anniversary date of your landing in July. So if you have been outside Canada 1150 days since your landing, you are currently short just 55 days. But if a Report has been prepared, you are short by an additional amount based on no credit for any days after the Report was prepared.

Leading to other H&C factors . . . in addition to the number of days you are in breach.

I am not sure how I can provide the any humanitarian and compassionate considerations along with
Supporting documents showing that there are compelling and compassionate factors in your personal circumstances that justify keeping your permanent resident status.

@Buletruck referred to explaining the reasons why you did not move to Canada sooner, mentioning reasons which IRCC will consider (must consider) in deciding whether you should be given relief for your breach of the RO, whether you deserve to keep PR status despite the failure to comply with the RO. Such reasons can make the difference, especially for a relatively small breach. This is where a lawyer can provide useful guidance, in helping you submit information about your reasons, helping you to submit what matters, what helps.

If you cannot obtain the assistance of a lawyer before you need to submit your response, as I already noted submit the information and documentation IRCC has requested, on time and doing the best you can. In regards to submitting H&C information, without guidance from a lawyer, probably best to just give a detailed, honest explanation of why it took as long as it did to make the move to Canada . . . that is, just tell YOUR story as it is.

Even if it is about needing to stay with employment in the U.S., which many here will say is not a H&C factor, or other financial factors, tell it like it is. Include an explanation of WHY you needed to stay with employment in the U.S. (BUT, go with a lawyer's guidance if you get that.)

Your story includes the extent to which you and your family have settled in Canada, the extent to which you invested in and are committed to establishing yourselves in Canada, and making this your permanent home.

If you are still working in the U.S., that will likely be considered a negative factor. If so, in explaining your story you probably want to include discussion about your efforts to find employment in Canada.

Some Procedural Observations:

As I noted, whether a Report has already been prepared or not could make a big difference. But that does not change how you respond much. I mention it more as a caution about where in the process you MIGHT be at this juncture.

Even if a 44(1) Report has been or is issued and it leads to a Removal/Departure Order, you can appeal and stay in Canada in the meantime, and you should be issued a one-year PR card in the meantime. Best to get a lawyer's assistance in the appeal process.

As long as your spouse is a Canadian (PR or citizen), worst case scenario is (as @Buletruck also mentioned) you can be sponsored for PR again.

 

[canuck78]

If it makes you feel better you could have also been reported due to your frequent interactions with CBSA while being non-compliant with your RO so this could have happened without your losing your PR card. One of the cardinal rules when it comes to not meeting your RO is to minimize any interaction with CBSA and IRCC until you back into compliance. Now that you have received this letter from IRCC one of the things you need to consider is how you will eliminate, or minimize if you have no other option, any further interactions with IRCC and CBSA. If you keep on traveling to the US after receiving this letter that will not help your case. This is one of the issues you should be speaking to a lawyer about as well as your employer. The goal should be to not leave Canada until you are compliant with your RO. If your family is out of compliance as well or have very little buffer room when it comes to the RO they should either not leave Canada until they meet RO or only leave if it is an emergency or a very important reason to travel if they still have up to a few weeks before they are out of compliance. You don’t mention if your wife is employed but if she is not that would be something I would prioritize. If you are the sole income earner and have continued to work at your job in the US after relocating to Canada that can work against your level of establishment in Canada. It will also raise concerns that your intention will be to move back to the US as soon as you get citizenship while still perhaps still working for those same US employer. If your spouse is working and has a career in Canada at least one family member is creating employment ties to Canada. All things that you should speak to a lawyer.

 

[dpenabill]

For @viveksharmaz . . . my previous post overlooked the difference it might make if you did not include any H&C information with the PR card application, if you were thinking that was not necessary since you were just asking to replace a lost card.

That is, if you did not answer item 5.7 in the application, including providing details and attaching relevant documents, it is possible that alone triggered this request, in which case the fact you have received what amounts to a PFL (procedural fairness letter) would not indicate cause to be alarmingly worried . . .
. . . indeed, given the fact you and, importantly, your family, have settled in Canada, if you had provided a detailed answer to 5.7 in the application that might have sufficed . . . and there should still be good odds that information will suffice (with some caution if you are still working in the states).

Either way, you need to timely and fully respond, but if you did provide a detailed response to 5.7, that makes it especially important to timely and fully respond, and more important to seek the assistance of a lawyer.

If you already included a detailed answer to 5.7, it would be a good idea to lawyer up even if you cannot manage that in time to timely respond -- in addition to responding as best you can, on time, you can also say you are seeking assistance from a lawyer and ask for more time to further respond.


Otherwise . . . Addressing postings from other thread, in an effort to avoid dispersing discussions regarding the OP's query in multiple threads:

We've seen your post before. How much more do you need?

Let's be honest with IRCC and try request for a withdrawal of the PR card renewal. Hoping for the best.

There is no indication that @viveksharmaz has not been honest or will not be honest. Re suggestion to withdraw . . .

I don't know for sure but I think withdrawing the PR card renewal app does NOT guarantee that any inquiry into status/residency obligation compliance will be halted. So I think would likely do more harm than good.

It is not likely, at this juncture for @viveksharmaz, that trying to withdraw the PR card application will help at all. Not likely to do any harm either. The OP is already, now, the subject of a RO examination. It is even possible that a 44(1) Inadmissibility Report has already been prepared (discussed in a previous post). At the least, the request for information and documents regarding the OP's compliance with the RO . . . specifically "up to the present day" . . . amounts to a PFL (procedural fairness letter). @viveksharmaz needs to timely respond to this request and, if they can, it would be a good idea to obtain a lawyer's assistance to do that.

Whereas: while this thread has concentrated on the negatives and risks (yes, it would have been better to not apply, although perhaps not realistic given circumstances of being employed in USA) - it seems that the residency obligation non-compliance is actually not that significant in this case *(less than six months? less than a year anyway). And in big pluses, the applicant is residing in Canada, employed, contributing to a Canadian household, residing with spouse/child in Canada (who could sponsor if the PR status was revoked, rendering revocation a bit pointless). Add to that some 'reasons' for not having returned earlier (economic uncertainty, hadn't found a job in Canada, whatever), the chances of this going badly (i.e. PR status revocation) are perhaps not that high. "Interests of a child resident in Canada" alone might do the trick)

(Yes, we can't estimate, and certainly don't know. But perhaps a better case than many)

*I'm referring to @viveksharmaz case, who jumped into this thread, not the other poster

As posted, where posted, this is confusing even apart from the multiple thread dispersal. In the thread where this was posted, "referring to @viveksharmaz case," there had been no discussion about it there beyond the curt comments by @steaky, let alone a discussion "concentrated on the negatives and risks."

But the main thing is that @viveksharmaz's query is not asking for a forecast about probable outcomes, but about what to do in response to the PFL (be that attendant a RO examination, or attendant a review of a 44(1) Report by a Minister's Delegate if a Report has already been prepared) asking for detailed information and documents regarding RO compliance. It's a damn good question deserving responsive replies.

It is important for a PR in a situation like this (the situation is not so different as @viveksharmaz appears to think) to focus on timely, carefully, and thoroughly responding to the request. It may be that given all the circumstances the odds of a favourable outcome are good, maybe good enough it is likely that @viveksharmaz will be allowed to keep PR status despite the RO breach . . . but for there to be a positive outcome it is imperative to timely, carefully, and thoroughly respond to the PFL requests.

Reminder: the request is for information up to the present day, clearly indicating this is about making a determination as to whether @viveksharmaz is currently inadmissible, not just about whether they are eligible for a PR card.

Leading to . . . "it seems that the residency obligation non-compliance is actually not that significant in this case . . ."

This is not a situation in which it is particularly hard to forecast, based on the PR's circumstances and extent of the RO breach, whether @viveksharmaz will be subject to RO compliance adjudication. That's already happening. That dramatically changes the risks. The odds still may be good. My sense is the odds are good (as long as the OP timely and thoroughly responds to the PFL requests) but that is not at all certain.

Key factor in how good the odds are is whether this is

-- a follow-up request for, in effect, an incomplete application (if OP did not provide a detailed response to 5.7 in the application), or​

-- a request attendant an officer's RO compliance examination, or​

-- a request attendant a MD's review of a 44(1) Report​

OP could find out if they are already the subject of a 44(1) Report through a GCMS record request but not anywhere near in time to get that information before responding to the PFL requests. And as noted, either way what the OP needs to do is the same: timely and thoroughly respond to the request.

Forum Discussion Observation; A Caution:

In discussing the risk of losing PR status for inadmissibility due to non-compliance with the RO, there is a tendency in this forum to focus on the factual situation notwithstanding which stage of processing is involved, underestimating the difference, the extent to which there is a significantly higher risk once officials are engaged in a RO compliance examination.

A lot of the anecdotal reporting, and risk-assessment conclusions based on that, reflect the relatively low risk for PRs at a PoE where, absent some salient factor triggering RO compliance concerns (such as a lengthy absence since the PRs last time in Canada, or an indication the PR is not currently residing in Canada, or something else flagging the PR), PRs in breach nonetheless have very good odds of being waived through without even being questioned about their RO compliance. Thus, for example, once settled in Canada without being flagged, many PRs in breach can continue to engage in brief cross-border travel with relatively low risk (as it appears has been the case for the OP).

Even though the underlying impact the extent of the breach has is comparable (smaller the breach, better the odds), once a PR in breach is subject to a RO examination, the odds are not nearly so good as they are of getting waived through a PoE. Hard to say how much difference there is but I apprehend it is a mistake to conflate characterizations of how "significant" a breach is respectively. That is, the impact being three months short of RO compliance is a different calculation depending on which stage of the process is involved, and it would be a mistake to think the odds in a RO examination assessing H&C considerations and whether the PR deserves to keep status are even all that comparable, let alone the same as the odds of getting waived through a PoE.

Clarification in Passing . . .

If you are the sole income earner . . .
If your spouse is working . . .

Not the sole earner . . .

Spouse is working . . .

As stated in the post you quoted:

My wife is also woring here now.

xxxxx