My Citizenship Application is Rejected - Please Don't Repeat My Mistake
- Thread starter AbdulIBX
- Start date
For purposes of compliance with the PR Residency Obligation, yes.Lily2011 said:Sorry to hear that your application has been rejected.
On the positive side, if your spouse is Canadian now, all trips with her outside Canada is counted towards physical presence (if I understand correctly).
Does not count toward qualifying for citizenship.
Hello again
My wife has a Decision Made from today of her electronic profile site. Last Friday the agent wanted our consent for our application to be separated. No need to sent specific additional form.
I should have wait longer before I submit my application. Lesson learned.
It is much better everyone to maintain personal, very detailed travel log file. Relying only on passport stamps is not good idea because for example on that exit day situation, I didn't had any exit Canadian stamp which is normal, but I didn't had any entry stamp from the country I travelled to.
Relying on CBSA records is also not good idea, because for some reason they share with us only 50% of what they actually posses as travel information. Apparently they share with the public only a short version of what they actually posses as travel information.
Our processing officer said that they have received our Entries log file and Exits log file twice from CBSA and another independent agency and from both Exit reports was clear that my Exit was on May 11th.
My wife also remembered that my exit travel date was indeed on May 11th just to confirm once again that CIC is right.
The agent advised me that I can apply again, because now he can see from our travel history after we have applied back in August(2015), that during the processing of our application we have had with my wife only 2 trips with a total duration of 35 days for the last 7 months. Which is again correct because we have travelled shortly after we submitted our application 2 times. We calculated the total absence days of those 2 trips and the CIC officer was again correct.
All our travels were by air.
Regards
Abdul
My wife has a Decision Made from today of her electronic profile site. Last Friday the agent wanted our consent for our application to be separated. No need to sent specific additional form.
I should have wait longer before I submit my application. Lesson learned.
It is much better everyone to maintain personal, very detailed travel log file. Relying only on passport stamps is not good idea because for example on that exit day situation, I didn't had any exit Canadian stamp which is normal, but I didn't had any entry stamp from the country I travelled to.
Relying on CBSA records is also not good idea, because for some reason they share with us only 50% of what they actually posses as travel information. Apparently they share with the public only a short version of what they actually posses as travel information.
Our processing officer said that they have received our Entries log file and Exits log file twice from CBSA and another independent agency and from both Exit reports was clear that my Exit was on May 11th.
My wife also remembered that my exit travel date was indeed on May 11th just to confirm once again that CIC is right.
The agent advised me that I can apply again, because now he can see from our travel history after we have applied back in August(2015), that during the processing of our application we have had with my wife only 2 trips with a total duration of 35 days for the last 7 months. Which is again correct because we have travelled shortly after we submitted our application 2 times. We calculated the total absence days of those 2 trips and the CIC officer was again correct.
All our travels were by air.
Regards
Abdul
OP said they relied on multiple sources and admits their date was correct.links18 said:CBSA records are not always entirely accurate or complete--although they are getting more accurate and more complete. But is CIC is making decisions based solely on CBSA records, something isn't right....
IRCC clearly does not rely entirely on any particular source, including the ICES report from CBSA.
Moreover, again, IRCC uses sources of information, like ICES, to cross-check or verify, not to independently establish dates of travel (except as to document an inaccuracy or error in the applicant's declaration).
I am curious as to the actual procedure in terms of rejecting or denying the application. Statute still provides for a CJ hearing if the Minister is not satisfied the presence requirement was met. Moreover, ordinarily a fairness letter must be delivered to the applicant prior to a denial in cases not referred to a CJ. Many times in the past applicants have been advised to withdraw their application. I am curious if that was the actual procedure here, advised and followed precisely so the applications could be split and one spouse receive the grant of citizenship.
In any event, I am fairly confident that if IRCC identifies a discrepancy between the applicant's declared dates of travel and what the ICES report indicates, the Minister cannot summarily recalculate residency and deny the application without allowing the applicant an opportunity to respond and, if the facts support it, challenge the ICES information. Of course the burden of proof is on the applicant, and in the absence of specific objective documentation corroborating the applicant's account, IRCC's conclusion will most likely be that the applicant failed to meet the burden of proof. The OP here conceded the error, so this was clearly not a case to contest. But if the applicant is quite certain the ICES report is in error, then contesting that and submitting proof to document the applicant's account should follow.
Moreover, again, IRCC uses sources of information, like ICES, to cross-check or verify, not to independently establish dates of travel (except as to document an inaccuracy or error in the applicant's declaration).
I am curious as to the actual procedure in terms of rejecting or denying the application. Statute still provides for a CJ hearing if the Minister is not satisfied the presence requirement was met. Moreover, ordinarily a fairness letter must be delivered to the applicant prior to a denial in cases not referred to a CJ. Many times in the past applicants have been advised to withdraw their application. I am curious if that was the actual procedure here, advised and followed precisely so the applications could be split and one spouse receive the grant of citizenship.
In any event, I am fairly confident that if IRCC identifies a discrepancy between the applicant's declared dates of travel and what the ICES report indicates, the Minister cannot summarily recalculate residency and deny the application without allowing the applicant an opportunity to respond and, if the facts support it, challenge the ICES information. Of course the burden of proof is on the applicant, and in the absence of specific objective documentation corroborating the applicant's account, IRCC's conclusion will most likely be that the applicant failed to meet the burden of proof. The OP here conceded the error, so this was clearly not a case to contest. But if the applicant is quite certain the ICES report is in error, then contesting that and submitting proof to document the applicant's account should follow.
Has something changed? All trips outside of Canada with Canadian citizen spouse now count towards maintenance of PR status? I thought one had to be "residing" abroad at a bona fide residence? Now, any old vacation counts?dpenabill said:For purposes of compliance with the PR Residency Obligation, yes.
Does not count toward qualifying for citizenship.
What's the "other independent agency" that OP says CIC referred to? Did they tell him? What other agency keeps records of our international travel? It sounds like CIC is heavily deferring to these records. Is OP sure they are right or has he been convinced they must be because that's what they say. They are the records after all. Who are we mere humans to question them?robw said:OP said they relied on multiple sources and admits their date was correct.
Nothing has changed regarding the PR RO.links18 said:Has something changed? All trips outside of Canada with Canadian citizen spouse now count towards maintenance of PR status? I thought one had to be "residing" abroad at a bona fide residence? Now, any old vacation counts?
It has long been a credit for time spent "accompanying" a Canadian citizen spouse. Proof of cohabitation suffices to show "accompanying" with no need to establish why the couple is abroad (some older cases distinguished who went with whom). In general, the credit is for time spent together.
Obviously, practically, there is no need for the credit unless the PR is living abroad (otherwise the PR has enough credit for time actually in Canada). If the PR is living abroad and the Canadian citizen spouse is not residing with the PR, then the PR is not accompanying the citizen spouse. Thus practically, sure, it comes down to cohabiting.
But the point, nonetheless, was to clarify that time together abroad does not count toward the citizenship physical presence requirement, whereas it does count toward compliance with the PR RO.
Not sure. Perhaps OP can clarify? I personally can't imagine there's some shadow organization tracking travel that isn't CBSA, but in this age of NSA spying and whatnot, who knows...links18 said:What's the "other independent agency" that OP says CIC referred to? Did they tell him? What other agency keeps records of our international travel? It sounds like CIC is heavily deferring to these records. Is OP sure they are right or has he been convinced they must be because that's what they say. They are the records after all. Who are we mere humans to question them?
You also might be right in that OP assumes they are correct because they're telling him so in an authoritative manner, but if we take his word on everything he says, perhaps they have additional avenues than the ICES to check travel history.
To be clear: even CBSA is NOT tracking travel.robw said:Not sure. Perhaps OP can clarify? I personally can't imagine there's some shadow organization tracking travel that isn't CBSA, but in this age of NSA spying and whatnot, who knows...
You also might be right in that OP assumes they are correct because they're telling him so in an authoritative manner, but if we take his word on everything he says, perhaps they have additional avenues than the ICES to check travel history.
The fact that certain information is captured (collected) relative to particular events (like POE examination upon entry), stored, and accessible, does not rise anywhere near to the level tracking travel.
On the other hand, it would be no surprise that IRCC can, and sometimes does, go to other sources for additional information, including information related to travel.
In a case a few years ago, the decision indicated that CIC had obtained information about a conference in Switzerland at which the applicant was featured as a participant on behalf of a certain company. There was no explanation as to how CIC obtained this information, only that it contradicted the applicant's travel declarations (which indicated he was in Canada at that time) and contradicted the applicant's report he was unemployed at that time as well. There was no hint there was extensive tracking of this individual's whereabouts or employment activities, only that CIC had acquired this specific information contrary to the information provided by the applicant.
There was a more recent case in which CIC inferred the applicant was abroad during a period of time based on items listed in the applicant's resume at linkedin.
Such cases reveal that CIC has indeed sought out alternative sources of information regarding applicants on at least some occasions.
And indeed, that is what CIC/IRCC does, and more so once a reason-to-question-residency/presence is identified, it conducts an examination of known information looking for anomalies, incongruities, inconsistencies, discrepancies, or omissions, and it may also either conduct an investigation itself or make a referral for another body of government to investigate (including most often CBSA and/or the RCMP), in which case the respective investigating body will probe other sources of information (including, on occasion, things like telephoning employers, landlords). But note: IRCC will not divulge the details of investigatory procedures. This information is strictly confidential. To the extent the public can know, that is usually dependent on extrapolating from anecdotal reports and what can be discerned in the officially published Federal Court decisions.
Hello again
We checked with my wife our archive of boarding passes and the exit date quoted from the processing agent was correct. On May 11th 2012 (almost 4 years ago) I was traveling to Jamaica for a short trip.
The processing agent said that he had requested our travels history twice and both times the report clearly showed Exit date May 11th. During the call he mentioned that they are using post June (2015) the database of another independent agency in addition with CBSA reports to verify our Entries and Exits made by Air.
I remember that on the day of our interview the interviewer asked us do we have any other international travels made by car, boat or train. We responded that all traveling we made was on International flights. After that he said if all out travels were by Air they can check now all the Exits and Entries which we made for the last 6 years.
He mentioned that now they have access to that extra pool of data due to their information sharing branches since now they are determining if the person have been indeed physically here for the required number of dates.
He was describing that independent agency as part of their Information Sharing Branches Network, but he didn't say the name of it, only that post June (2015) they have access to their database.
Our best guess is that it has direct relation to the airplane companies ( Information related to confirmed flights or confirmed boarding passes, it seems something in direct relation with the data collected on the airports on our international flights)
So with that correction and recalculation from the agent on my physical days he said that we have to split our application, because I am not eligible with that application for citizenship. He said that now he see that I have more than enough days in Canada to apply again, so he recommended to us to withdraw my application in order to let my wife take the Oath soon. It was a fair and good deal.
Regards
Abdul
We checked with my wife our archive of boarding passes and the exit date quoted from the processing agent was correct. On May 11th 2012 (almost 4 years ago) I was traveling to Jamaica for a short trip.
The processing agent said that he had requested our travels history twice and both times the report clearly showed Exit date May 11th. During the call he mentioned that they are using post June (2015) the database of another independent agency in addition with CBSA reports to verify our Entries and Exits made by Air.
I remember that on the day of our interview the interviewer asked us do we have any other international travels made by car, boat or train. We responded that all traveling we made was on International flights. After that he said if all out travels were by Air they can check now all the Exits and Entries which we made for the last 6 years.
He mentioned that now they have access to that extra pool of data due to their information sharing branches since now they are determining if the person have been indeed physically here for the required number of dates.
He was describing that independent agency as part of their Information Sharing Branches Network, but he didn't say the name of it, only that post June (2015) they have access to their database.
Our best guess is that it has direct relation to the airplane companies ( Information related to confirmed flights or confirmed boarding passes, it seems something in direct relation with the data collected on the airports on our international flights)
So with that correction and recalculation from the agent on my physical days he said that we have to split our application, because I am not eligible with that application for citizenship. He said that now he see that I have more than enough days in Canada to apply again, so he recommended to us to withdraw my application in order to let my wife take the Oath soon. It was a fair and good deal.
Regards
Abdul
Jeez, so an honest mistake involving a vacation (I am assuming) to warmer climes makes you less worthy of citizenship than your wife? Here is an example of the problems of a strict physical presence requirement with no basic residence fall back. Lucky for you, you sound like you will be able to apply again. Some people wont get that chance.....