+1(514) 937-9445 or Toll-free (Canada & US) +1 (888) 947-9445

Police Certificate

Didi17

Member
Nov 17, 2017
17
5
Hi All,

I have been calling/reading/gathering information regarding this Police Certificate thing as I'm in the same boat as well. I landed in Canada in 2014..According to the new law (1095 days), I am now eligible to apply for citizenship. The police certificate is required for 4 years back prior to applying, so this takes us to 2013.. the year where I was still waiting in the country where I applied for immigration. I called today CIC to find out whether this year (the year waiting for immigration outside Canada) is considered as part of the 183 days which requires one to get a PCC..the agent told me NO. They take into consideration the absence of 183+ days AFTER becoming a permanent resident in Canada. I asked why isn't this clearly mentioned on the form to avoid confusion??? He said it's still a new form and they are receiving a lot of complaints regarding this matter. I invite everyone here who still has a doubt whether he/she should apply for PCC to cover the 183 days spent outside Canada waiting to arrive as a PR to call CIC to confirm what I was told. Thanks
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: blueangel371115

blueangel371115

Hero Member
May 24, 2012
994
32
Category........
FAM
Visa Office......
CPP-Ottawa
App. Filed.......
13-01-2014
Doc's Request.
10-02-2014
AOR Received.
17-07-2014
File Transfer...
17-07-2014
Med's Done....
02-12-2013
Interview........
Waived
Passport Req..
waived
VISA ISSUED...
08-01-2015 (returned 1/19 due to errors), 26-01-2015
LANDED..........
05-02-2015 Finally
I may just do that, thanks. This will save me time and money, as I probably wouldn't need one if this is true. Otherwise, I would.
 

dpenabill

VIP Member
Apr 2, 2010
6,252
3,018
I may just do that, thanks. This will save me time and money, as I probably wouldn't need one if this is true. Otherwise, I would.
Caution: Details matter. Truthfulness matters. Impressions matter.

Be wary of purported call centre agent answers which derive from a query which is rooted in arguing for an interpretation that will excuse the applicant from submitting a police certificate more than genuinely asking what it is that IRCC is asking and what IRCC expects.

In particular, if you were in another country for 183 or more days in the four years prior to the date of your application, before checking [No] in response to item 10.b it warrants carefully considering what is the truthful answer to the question.

Applicants who believe it should not be necessary for them to submit a police certificate, based on excluding time prior to landing from the calculation of days in another country, can check [Yes] and state an explanation for this in the space provided in the form. This should pass the completeness check pursuant to which the application should then be processed. Then, if IRCC does not really want or require a police certificate from such applicants, there should be no problem during the processing stage. Worst case scenario is that IRCC does want the police certificate, even though the time in the other country was prior to landing, and requests it later (probably during the interview).

My sense is the latter, that IRCC will still want a police certificate even if the days in the other country (within four years) preceded landing. Applicants may nonetheless take this approach, checking [Yes] and explaining that they have not been in the other country since landing, in order to avoid waiting to apply; they can then proceed to obtain the police certificate in the meantime, so they can submit it later if it is requested, thereby avoiding much delay. That said, there is also a fair chance that IRCC will be relatively liberal about excusing applicants from submitting a police certificate if the applicant has not returned to the respective country since landing. So the [Yes] check and explanation may suffice for some, perhaps even many, even if IRCC generally wants a police certificate based on presence in a country prior to landing. Thus, this option involves checking [Yes], giving an explanation, and then seeing how it goes.

Best approach, however, is probably to answer the question truthfully and if that means checking [Yes] to then follow the instructions and provide a police certificate.



Other option:

Applicants who feel confident that days prior to landing do not need to be counted can check [No] and include a supplemental page with the application, referring specifically to item 10.b, and explain that the [No] check is based on not counting days prior to landing. Just checking [No] without any explanation leaves it up to a total stranger bureaucrat to interpret whether this was appropriate or a misrepresentation.

To be clear about this option, however, this means answering item 10.b as if the question is:
In the past four (4) years, or since becoming a PR, whichever was more recent, were you in another country (other than Canada) for a total of 183 days or more? [No] [Yes]

In contrast, the actual question in the current application form is:
In the past four (4) years, were you in another country (other than Canada) for a total of 183 days or more? [No] [Yes]
 
  • Like
Reactions: blueangel371115

waiting110

Champion Member
Feb 22, 2012
1,237
23
Category........
Visa Office......
Islamabad: Husband's case
Job Offer........
Pre-Assessed..
App. Filed.......
Oct 2012
File Transfer...
Nov 2012 to Ottawa, June 2013 to Isl, Feb 2014 to London
I want to add about the police certificate that the previous condition was to live 4 years in Canada out of the 6. I believe the 4 there is an error. It should say 3. I looked in to apply for police certificate for Pakistan and the questions are posed as if they are for a PR holder not a national. I am going to write a letter explaining my understanding and will ask them if they still need a certificate, I can provide.
 

razerblade

VIP Member
Feb 21, 2014
4,197
1,355
Hi All,

I have been calling/reading/gathering information regarding this Police Certificate thing as I'm in the same boat as well. I landed in Canada in 2014..According to the new law (1095 days), I am now eligible to apply for citizenship. The police certificate is required for 4 years back prior to applying, so this takes us to 2013.. the year where I was still waiting in the country where I applied for immigration. I called today CIC to find out whether this year (the year waiting for immigration outside Canada) is considered as part of the 183 days which requires one to get a PCC..the agent told me NO. They take into consideration the absence of 183+ days AFTER becoming a permanent resident in Canada. I asked why isn't this clearly mentioned on the form to avoid confusion??? He said it's still a new form and they are receiving a lot of complaints regarding this matter. I invite everyone here who still has a doubt whether he/she should apply for PCC to cover the 183 days spent outside Canada waiting to arrive as a PR to call CIC to confirm what I was told. Thanks
IRCC call center agents cannot be trusted. To prove my point, check out the following official tweet from IRCC regarding the matter (read the comments as well):

https://twitter.com/PatrikBC/status/918669785382109184
 

waiting110

Champion Member
Feb 22, 2012
1,237
23
Category........
Visa Office......
Islamabad: Husband's case
Job Offer........
Pre-Assessed..
App. Filed.......
Oct 2012
File Transfer...
Nov 2012 to Ottawa, June 2013 to Isl, Feb 2014 to London
is it one of the social media agent or the processing officer?
 

dpenabill

VIP Member
Apr 2, 2010
6,252
3,018
I want to add about the police certificate that the previous condition was to live 4 years in Canada out of the 6. I believe the 4 there is an error. It should say 3. I looked in to apply for police certificate for Pakistan and the questions are posed as if they are for a PR holder not a national. I am going to write a letter explaining my understanding and will ask them if they still need a certificate, I can provide.
No. The reference in item 10.b to the previous FOUR (4) YEARS is correct. It is NOT a mistake.

Item 10.b is about verifying there is no prohibition arising from charges or convictions in a country other than Canada during the four years prior to the application.

In particular, the applicable statutory provision is 22(3)(a) in the Citizenship Act (see http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-29/page-6.html#docCont ), which explicitly refers to "the four-year period immediately before the date of the person’s application" (emphasis added).

This has NOTHING to do with the applicable physical presence requirement.



The Anatomy of Forum Errors; An Autopsy (a FWIW tangent):

This issue, the relevant time period for identifying which applicants need to submit a police certificate with the application, offers a good illustration of how, sometimes, an erroneous or false position can be commonly and repeatedly stated in a forum like this.

There were many forum participants who were adamant that this time period would be reduced to three years when the new physical presence requirement (the 3/5 rule versus the 4/6 rule) came into effect, and a couple of them insisted that IRCC call centre agents verified this. Since the statute specifies the relevant time period during which charges in another country would constitute a prohibition, and does NOT specify what proof is necessary to show this, IRCC's criteria for who must submit a police certificate is discretionary (so long as it is reasonable). So it was possible, merely possible, that this part of the application could have changed. BUT it was highly unlikely, because the prohibition period, again, is FOUR years, and that part of the Citizenship Act was NOT changed in Bill C-6.

And, indeed, IRCC did not make such a change. It could have, and still could anytime. But there was no reason, none at all, to think that IRCC might change this. Nonetheless, many forum participants insisted otherwise, and again a few insisted that IRCC call centre agents actually confirmed this would change to three years. (And, as seen above, there are still occasional (erroneous) assertions that it should be three years.)

I cannot say for sure who was wrong, what caused the error. Perhaps --
-- the forum participants reporting the call centre agent's statement that this would change to three years were trolls, deliberately giving false information, OR
-- the forum participants misunderstood what the call centre agents said, OR
-- the call centre agents misunderstood the question, OR
-- the call centre agents were simply giving wrong information

I can say with great confidence those reports in the forum, that IRCC was going to change this to three years, were in error. They were wrong. There was never any reason to so much as suspect such a change would happen.

While it is possible (as outlined above) that call centre agents gave erroneous information, otherwise all accounts or reports suggesting this would change to three years were clearly based on the MISUNDERSTANDING that the requirement to submit a police certificate was related to the physical presence requirement. (Again, it is NOT.)

I doubt the call centre agents gave erroneous information about this. Which is to say I believe the source of error in the forum was one of the other reasons (actually, could have been different reasons for different participants who were posting there would be a change to three years, more than a few insisting).

Which leads to the diagnosis of a common pathology in forum reports purportedly based on information obtained from a call centre agent: it is clear that many times the person reporting what a call centre agent answered in response to questions like this (versus standard FAQ like questions) has in some respect advocated a response (typically based on a hypothetical scenario) rather than asking the call centre agent a straight-forward, direct question. Forum reports based on such exchanges with call centre agents are inherently NOT reliable.

This is not to suggest this is common let alone dominant. Many reports in this forum based on call centre agent answers are credible and useful.

So the trick is discerning what reports are helpful versus those which are potentially misleading or outright untrue, separating-the-wheat-from-the-chaff.

Unfortunately I suspect more than a few prospective citizenship applicants were misled. I suspect that among some who were waiting for the 3/5 rule to come into effect, which would then make them eligible for citizenship, may have not prepared, may not have obtained a police certificate, relying on the erroneous forum reports that they would not need to submit a police certificate. So when the new rules took effect, they did not have a police certificate to send.

I doubt they are prejudiced much by this, beyond a delay . . . a delay either upfront, while they obtained the certificate to send with the application, or later if they elected to proceed without the certificate and are later required to submit one. But this nonetheless illustrates the genesis of misleading or erroneous information which, unfortunately, occasionally populates the forum. I hope this illustration will help others hone their critical thinking skills, to help discussions in the forum, in particular helping to separate-the-wheat-from-the-chaff . . . .

In general, reports based on purported call centre agent answers for complicated questions should be approached with much caution. The call centre is good mostly for two things:

-- FAQ type questions, meaning questions which can be readily answered by looking at a script of sorts, and
-- specific details related to an individual application, matters the call centre agent can look up in the GCMS record for the individual and report about

Beyond that, there tends to be a sliding scale in the reliability of reports based on call centre agent conversations. This has as much, if not more, to do with the form of questions and answers which can too easily lead to misunderstanding. That is, it is not so much that the call centre agents give an erroneous answer. It is more that erroneous answers are due to some misunderstanding, either as to the question, or as to the answer. The more complicated the question, the less reliable the reported, purported answer.
 

usaorcanada

Full Member
May 17, 2017
33
6
Hello Folks,

Working solution for this problem, you still submit your application with answer YES to 10.b and write explanation that you are in process to get PCC from that country and can submit at time of interview. Having said that please seriously start the process to obtain the PCC, but during this time when you are waiting for it your application is also processing.:):)
 

rfasihi

Star Member
Aug 5, 2012
68
7
What about those who lived in middle east under work visa got clearance n cancellation of work/family visa from Ministry of Interior and never went back. Ministry will never clear you if you have any criminal record, any feedback, this applies to my case and i am taking this route
 

maniac2403

Champion Member
Mar 19, 2013
1,103
107
Category........
Visa Office......
CPP-O
NOC Code......
1122
Job Offer........
Pre-Assessed..
App. Filed.......
18-11-2013
Doc's Request.
29-05-2014
AOR Received.
27-12-2013
IELTS Request
Provided with application
File Transfer...
04-06-2014 (ECAS In Process)
Med's Request
10-06-2014
Med's Done....
11-06-2014
Interview........
None
Passport Req..
20-06-2014
VISA ISSUED...
27-06-2014 (Visa stamp) 9-07-2014 (Passport Received)
LANDED..........
10-07-2014
What about those who lived in middle east under work visa got clearance n cancellation of work/family visa from Ministry of Interior and never went back. Ministry will never clear you if you have any criminal record, any feedback, this applies to my case and i am taking this route
That is not a substitute of a PCC unfortunately. The citizenship application clearly asks for a PCC if you lived in another country for a certain period of time during your eligibility period.
 

drezashah

Full Member
Jun 28, 2017
34
7
Hi friends
I have submitted my pr application and i have my AOR.
Since i resided more than 6 months in Australia I provided a police certificate from Aus federal police.
Here is the Q
Is there goin to be a problem regarding my application If I travel again to Australia next month? As they need a certificate obtained after our last exit
Tnx in advance
 

rfasihi

Star Member
Aug 5, 2012
68
7
That is not a substitute of a PCC unfortunately. The citizenship application clearly asks for a PCC if you lived in another country for a certain period of time during your eligibility period.
I understand, we can submit police certificate during the process as well, they did not mention that the application will be returned. Also they as ... "if we dont get it, please explain"... this means they would like to listen the reason if not attaching a PCC with application. If they dont agree with our argument, they will ask to submitt PCC rather sending the entire application back...
 

maniac2403

Champion Member
Mar 19, 2013
1,103
107
Category........
Visa Office......
CPP-O
NOC Code......
1122
Job Offer........
Pre-Assessed..
App. Filed.......
18-11-2013
Doc's Request.
29-05-2014
AOR Received.
27-12-2013
IELTS Request
Provided with application
File Transfer...
04-06-2014 (ECAS In Process)
Med's Request
10-06-2014
Med's Done....
11-06-2014
Interview........
None
Passport Req..
20-06-2014
VISA ISSUED...
27-06-2014 (Visa stamp) 9-07-2014 (Passport Received)
LANDED..........
10-07-2014
I understand, we can submit police certificate during the process as well, they did not mention that the application will be returned. Also they as ... "if we dont get it, please explain"... this means they would like to listen the reason if not attaching a PCC with application. If they dont agree with our argument, they will ask to submitt PCC rather sending the entire application back...
I agree with what you are saying. For my PR application, I had submitted my application without a PCC with a letter attached that I have applied for the PCC and I would provide it to CIC as soon as I get my AOR and the PCC. Everything went fine.

Now that being said, if not providing a PCC and one mentions the reasons as to why one cannot get them, the decision rests with the case officers if they are willing to let it go or not. This might cause delays in the application, but if it is near impossible to get the PCC, then go ahead and provide a letter with strong reasons as to why the PCC cannot be obtained.