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

Police Clearance for Citizenship Application

canimmigrate

Star Member
Oct 21, 2012
136
1
CT, USA
Category........
Visa Office......
New Delhi
Job Offer........
Pre-Assessed..
I landed in Canada in July 2014 and so now, with the rule change, I qualify to apply for citizenship.

While filing the citizenship application, I noticed that if we have been out of Canada for more than 163 days in last 4 years then we need to provide PCC from that country.

I never left Canda after landing in July 2014 but if the period is 4 years then I was in India for more than 6 months in last 4 years. I.e I was in India for more that 6 months before I came to Canada. So, do I need PCC from India?

I I need PCC then I've a question about the address:

The address that is mentioned on my passport is no longer accessible to me as we have sold that house a year ago. My parents are also in Canada now and there is nobody in India who can help with address verification in case police go there to check.

Similar for my wife. Address on her passport is also old and no one from her family is there to handle query. Her passport is also about to expire next month.

Did anyone have similar issue? I understand that we need to put India address on the form. Which address that should be? Permanent address in India? Any address in India?
Is there any delay/problem if this address is not same as the address on the passport? Does anyone have any experience where the address on the passport and the address on the form were different?

I'm really desperate for any help that I can get. I'll try to call CGI but not sure if that will be of much help.
 

canimmigrate

Star Member
Oct 21, 2012
136
1
CT, USA
Category........
Visa Office......
New Delhi
Job Offer........
Pre-Assessed..
thanks. Can someone please help with the address query also?
 

vasvas

Star Member
Oct 12, 2017
141
56
The PCC is given by the Indian Consulate (now outsourced to BLS). They do not send people to verify addresses. What they do is to send your file to the RPO that issued your passport and they apparently check if your name appears on some list (as was told to me by the consulate staff when I had mine done years ago).
 

Didi17

Member
Nov 17, 2017
17
5
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.
 

wolfpack27616

Hero Member
Apr 10, 2010
292
77
Job Offer........
Pre-Assessed..
I landed in Canada in July 2014 and so now, with the rule change, I qualify to apply for citizenship.

While filing the citizenship application, I noticed that if we have been out of Canada for more than 163 days in last 4 years then we need to provide PCC from that country.

I never left Canda after landing in July 2014 but if the period is 4 years then I was in India for more than 6 months in last 4 years. I.e I was in India for more that 6 months before I came to Canada. So, do I need PCC from India?

I I need PCC then I've a question about the address:

The address that is mentioned on my passport is no longer accessible to me as we have sold that house a year ago. My parents are also in Canada now and there is nobody in India who can help with address verification in case police go there to check.

Similar for my wife. Address on her passport is also old and no one from her family is there to handle query. Her passport is also about to expire next month.

Did anyone have similar issue? I understand that we need to put India address on the form. Which address that should be? Permanent address in India? Any address in India?
Is there any delay/problem if this address is not same as the address on the passport? Does anyone have any experience where the address on the passport and the address on the form were different?

I'm really desperate for any help that I can get. I'll try to call CGI but not sure if that will be of much help.
My 2 cents-

1. It's 183 days and not 163 days like you had mentioned.

2. You can avoid all the PCC drama if you can just wait for another 2 months or so for your Eligibility Period to adjust to a time where you wouldn't have stayed back in India for more than 183 days. If you haven't done it so far, please calculate what future date of application would mean you wouldn't have to submit PCC.

For example- if you had landed as a PR on July 1st 2014, and had not been to India after that- if you wait for another 42 days to apply- you would not need to apply for PCC.

3. From what I understand- applying PCC from BLS is not too complicated. Make sure you mention the address that is consistent with what you had mentioned for that timeline in your PR application.

Good luck!
 
  • Like
Reactions: dpenabill

wolfpack27616

Hero Member
Apr 10, 2010
292
77
Job Offer........
Pre-Assessed..
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.
That might make logical sense. But it's only one CIC phone rep's word. Unless you have something in writing- it's too risky to go with just 1 rep's words. In this forum we have had different posters report with different answers from different CIC reps about question 9C. Some said a rep asked them to answer yes, and some said a rep said to answer no.

All said and done- until (or rather if at all) they correct the form, or unless you get something in writing- it would be better to play it safe and apply with whatever instruction is laid out.
 

Kan_Sri

Champion Member
Feb 14, 2014
2,244
354
Visa Office......
New Delhi
App. Filed.......
Mar 05-2014
I agree with you, if the form says get a PCC i would get a PCC. I am planning to apply this week and i have got my pcc from before i was in canada and i would enclose it with my application.

That might make logical sense. But it's only one CIC phone rep's word. Unless you have something in writing- it's too risky to go with just 1 rep's words. In this forum we have had different posters report with different answers from different CIC reps about question 9C. Some said a rep asked them to answer yes, and some said a rep said to answer no.

All said and done- until (or rather if at all) they correct the form, or unless you get something in writing- it would be better to play it safe and apply with whatever instruction is laid out.
 

ChippyBoy

Hero Member
Dec 5, 2016
375
168
2. You can avoid all the PCC drama if you can just wait for another 2 months or so for your Eligibility Period to adjust to a time where you wouldn't have stayed back in India for more than 183 days. If you haven't done it so far, please calculate what future date of application would mean you wouldn't have to submit PCC.
If I understand correctly, IRCC can, if they wish, ask any applicant to provide a pcc, regardless of the 183 day rule. So the OP might be wise to wait, but yet go ahead and get a pcc in the mean time?
 

dpenabill

VIP Member
Apr 2, 2010
6,252
3,018
This is lengthy and spans multiple posts. Most get it and should thus SKIP this post and my additional post(s) that follow.

In general, my rationale for revisiting this issue, which has already been addressed in depth in other threads, is to emphasize the importance of responding to questions TRUTHFULLY and the importance of approaching any suggestion otherwise with skepticism.

While how to appropriately approach answering a particular question may be arguable, there is little doubt that overall the most prudent response is almost always the most truthful response.

Nonetheless, there are persistent suggestions to the contrary regarding item 10.b. While most get it, meaning they understand that the best answer is the honest answer, that it can be risky responding to a question as if IRCC is really asking a different question, it warrants fully illuminating the flawed thinking which suggests giving what really is an overtly false answer to item 10.b (EVEN IF ultimately there is NO PROBLEM).

Thus, what follows is for anyone inclined to check [No] in response to item 10.b, or inclined to suggest others check [No] in response to item 10.b, based on not counting days in a country prior to landing but within the preceding four years. I will make a concerted effort to get the details right and to clearly illuminate the reasoning, in order to facilitate making informed, intelligent decisions about how to navigate the process. In large part this is about how being truthful minimizes risks.

In the meantime, however, it warrants cautioning the extent to which multiple participants in this forum INSISTED (in the weeks and months before October 11th) that help centre agents explicitly and clearly confirmed that when the new 3/5 presence rules took effect, the police certificate requirement would be based on presence in another country during the preceding THREE years rather than four. While it was obvious that was WRONG, and more than a few of us clearly illuminated that and why, it was impossible to definitively say whether the call centre agent simply was wrong, whether the call centre agent misunderstood the question, whether the forum participant reporting the call misunderstood the agent's answer, or whether it was simply a false post. Eventually, of course, the new form was issued, and it was confirmed that the relevant time period for determining who would need to submit a police certificate was still four years.

While call centre agents do, sometimes, give wrong answers for queries not falling clearly within their script for FAQs (thus, as others have reported, for queries outside the scope of FAQs, the answers given by call centre agents are not uniformly let alone universally reliable), and forum participants sometimes misrepresent what was asked or answered in a call to the help centre, the most common reason for an erroneous forum report about a call agent's response is rooted in some misunderstanding about the actual question being answered or an overly broad interpretation of the agent's response.

In regards to this particular issue, for example, just because a call centre agent agrees or confirms that IRCC does not need a police certificate from an applicant who has not been in another country for a total of 183 or more days SINCE landing, does NOT mean the call centre agent has confirmed that the applicant should check [No] in response to item 10.b based on not counting days in another country prior to landing.

Moreover, and this is the critical part, the call centre agent's response does not guarantee how the IRCC processing agent, the total stranger bureaucrat who actually assesses the application, will interpret the [No] response to item 10.b if, in fact, the applicant was in another country 183 or more days within the four years preceding the date of application. To simply check [No] contrary to the facts leaves it up to that total stranger bureaucrat to interpret whether that was an appropriate response (not counting days prior to landing) or a deceitful response. In this regard, it warrants remembering that a processing agent's negative perception of the applicant's credibility can have a detrimental impact even if there is no specific accusation of misrepresentation. "Honesty is the best policy" is as much (if not more) about the practical impact of being perceived as lacking credibility as it about actual veracity.

Leading to this:

Reminder: Overall the best approach is to answer the question asked truthfully.

For those who believe there may be some exception for item 10.b, the general guiding principles for completing the citizenship application form still apply:
-- if in doubt, follow the instructions, otherwise, yep, follow the instructions
-- be RESPONSIVE and TRUTHFUL

That is, in the most general terms, applicants need to read and follow the instructions as best they can, based on their best understanding of what is being asked, and then give a complete, accurate, and honest response according to their best understanding of what is asked and what the facts are.

Item 10.b clearly and explicitly asks whether the applicant was in another country a total of 183 or more days within the preceding four (4) years. Period. NO "or since landing and becoming a PR, whichever is more recent."

In this regard, item 10.b does NOT ASK whether the applicant should or is required to submit a police certificate. The truthful response to item 10.b DOES NOT DEPEND on whether the applicant needs to submit a police certificate.

It may be correct (I very much doubt it, but it is possible) that IRCC does not want, anticipate, expect, or require an applicant to submit a police certificate if the applicant was not in another country 183 or more days since landing, even if the applicant was in another country 183 or more days within the preceding four years.

It may even be the case that IRCC will be totally OK with such an applicant checking [No] in response to item 10.b. Nonetheless, however, this approach is NOT prudent. The prudent approach is to answer the question posed truthfully and then, for the applicant who believes there is an exception, to somehow assert the exception. The applicant could, for example, in one way or another explain why no police certificate is submitted. At the least, for an applicant who persists in checking [No] based on excluding pre-landing days from the calculation, it would be prudent for the applicant to add a supplemental explanation for why [No] was checked.

To simply check [No] contrary to the facts, leaves it up to a total stranger bureaucrat to interpret whether that was an appropriate response (not counting days prior to landing) or a deceitful response. No matter how many IRCC call centre agents said it was OK to do it this way.


Revisiting longer, more in-depth observations and analysis of this issue:

This issue has been addressed in depth and in multiple topics. I revisit this in depth again because there is a persistent suggestion that it is OK to give an UNTRUTHFUL response to a clearly stated question. How problematic that is in the context of item 10.b in the current application form, I am not at all sure. It may not be problematic. That, however, is not what is critical.

It warrants noting that in the context of item 9.c, for example, my sense is that an untruthful [No] response is not likely to be problematic. (I nonetheless think the better approach is to truthfully answer item 9.c as well, and add an explanation for why no CIT 0177 is being submitted.)

In particular, however, there is a significant distinction between the question posed in item 10.b, for which a [Yes] response triggers the instruction to submit a police certificate OR explain why not, versus the question posed in item 9.c for which a [Yes] response triggers the instruction to submit CIT 0177 (form for claiming Crown Service credits). If I have time, I will address this distinction further later. For now, to my view the prudence of responding truthfully to the questions, as asked, is overriding. Thus, even if an inaccurate [No] response for item 9.c is NOT at all problematic, to my view the prudent approach is to respond truthfully and if that means checking [Yes], check [Yes] and hand write NA next to it or add a supplemental page stating why no CIT 0177 is submitted, or submit the CIT 0177 with NA written across it.

Thus, obviously, again given the overriding principle to respond truthfully to the question as asked, even if an untruthful [No] response to item 10.b (based on not counting pre-landing days in another country) will not be a problem, unless and until the form itself is revised the PRUDENT approach is to answer the question truthfully, as asked, and if that means checking [Yes] even though the applicant believes IRCC does not actually want a police certificate, based on only counting days after landing, to still check [Yes] and then explain why no police certificate is submitted. Or, at the least, if [No] is checked in this situation (based on not counting days prior to landing), to add an explanation as to why [No] is checked.

[to be continued . . . ]
 

dpenabill

VIP Member
Apr 2, 2010
6,252
3,018
[. . . continued from previous post]

As I was saying, given the overriding principle to respond truthfully to the question as asked, even if an untruthful [No] response to item 10.b (based on not counting pre-landing days in another country) will not be a problem, unless and until the form itself is revised the PRUDENT approach is to answer the question truthfully, as asked . . .

This leads to the following post:

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.
How to respond TRUTHFULLY to the question posed in item 10.b in the current application form, to check [No] or [Yes], does NOT depend on whether IRCC wants, expects, or requires a police certificate.

This post, by Didi17, seems to suggest that it is OK for some applicants to check [No] even though the truthful answer to the question is [Yes].

Somewhat similar views have been asserted by others. The following is one example (partial quote):

I checked with IRCC agent, supervisor, and finally their customer support manager during a 102-min long call with examples such as defining eligibility period, relevant 3 years (when no ties before), and 183 days Police Certificate requirements.
No crystal ball divination is necessary to recognize the dynamics underlying that account about what was learned from the IRCC call centre. The irony is that NN74's take away was the exchange constituted a confirmation no police certificate is needed if the days in the other country preceded the date of landing, when it is quite apparent the initial call centre agent, and that agent's supervisor, would not confirm that, and the customer support manager reportedly, ultimately, acknowledged that in the scenarios posed (by NN74) a police certificate would not be required . . . nonetheless leaving open the question about whether it is OK to give a false answer for item 10.b

That's the crux of it. Whether the applicant should give a false answer to item 10.b no matter how certain the applicant is that IRCC does not need a police certificate in his or her circumstances.

The important question is whether to answer [No] to item 10.b even if the applicant was in fact in another country 183 or more days within the preceding four years.

No speculation necessary to apprehend this is imprudent, ill-advised, even if three help centre agents confirm that IRCC does not intend to ask for police certificates from applicants who have not been in another country for 183 or more days since landing and becoming a Canadian PR.

This is NOT to assert that a [No] response based on not counting days in a country before landing and becoming a PR will necessarily cause any problem, let alone result in a prosecution for misrepresentation. IRCC may indeed accept such responses in such circumstances. (Caution: AOR does NOT signal anything at all about the appropriate way to answer item 10.b; indeed, a [No] response will, in itself, clear the completeness check even if it is blatantly contrary to the true facts.)

Rather, it is to assert that it is imprudent, ill-advised, to respond in a way that is overtly contrary to the true facts.

Just to check [No] based on not counting days prior to landing, without any qualifying or clarifying explanation, leaves it up to a total stranger bureaucrat to interpret whether that was an appropriate response (not counting days prior to landing) or a deceitful response.

In any event, the question posed in item 10.b continues to explicitly ask about the previous four (4) years, no exceptions, and this will continue to be the case unless and until IRCC actually revises the application form, so that item 10.b is restated in a way which prescribes the relevant time period to be "the past four years," OR "since becoming a PR, whichever is more recent."


Some Particular Observations:

I called today CIC to find out . . .

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.
To be clear, there is no way to telephone CIC these days. CIC ceased to exist nearly two years ago.

As for telephoning the IRCC telephone help centre, as always the reliability of the response obtained can depend a great deal on the question asked. Some details matter, and some details matter a lot.

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.
Frankly, the question reported here undermines reliance on the conclusion reported. Again, some details matter and some matter a lot.

To be clear, the current application, in item 10.b, asks:
In the past four (4) years, were you in another country (other than Canada) for a total of 183 days or more? [No] [Yes]

Answering that question truthfully does NOT depend on whether or not the applicant is obligated to submit a police certificate. The truthful answer remains the same whether IRCC actually wants a police certificate from the applicant or not.

While there may be varying interpretations as to what "take into consideration" means, the vagueness of that response tends to put an exclamation mark on the agent's comments about how many complaints about this item they have received. And suggesting that more than a few of those making the complaint are arguing for an interpretation excusing them from submitting a police certificate more than genuinely asking what it is that IRCC is asking and what IRCC expects.

As I have previously posted:
. . . there is NO DOUBT, really none at all, if an applicant was in another country a total of 183 or more days within the preceding FOUR years, regardless the various scenarios related to how many of those days preceded when the person became a PR, the proper response to item 10.b is to check "yes." No doubt about that at all. If an applicant believes he should not, or even does not need to submit a police certificate, despite checking "yes" (such as because all days in that country preceded coming to and landing as a PR in Canada), that applicant can submit an explanation why rather than a police certificate and see how it goes.
That much is clear.


Will IRCC change the application to prescribe the relevant time period as the past four years, OR since becoming a PR, whichever is more recent?

Beyond emphasizing that the most appropriate response to item 10.b is to answer the question posed truthfully, I very much DOUBT that IRCC will revise item 10.b to prescribe the relevant time period as the past four years, OR since becoming a PR, whichever is more recent.

There is no need to speculate about this. We will see once IRCC issues a revised application form, which is already well overdue.

Nonetheless, without revisiting the more in-depth discussion about this, my take on this derives from the fact that the request for a police certificate is specifically based on showing proof of no prohibitions arising from any foreign convictions during the four years preceding the application. Date the applicant became a PR is not really a factor.

This is not to guarantee IRCC will not revise the form this way. I am merely saying that is unlikely. Moreover, this is not to say that IRCC will always require a police certificate from every applicant who checks [Yes] to the question as currently stated. My guess is that IRCC will be somewhat liberal in terms of accepting reasons for not submitting a police certificate.

In particular, some applicants may choose to not delay applying while waiting to obtain a police certificate; they can check [Yes] and in the explanation space state that they understand they do not need to submit a police certificate (such as because the time in the other country was before they became a PR). And then see how it goes. Probably a good idea to proceed to obtain a police certificate in the meantime, so that if IRCC still requires a police certificate they can submit it promptly, with minimum delay. This approach should pass the completeness check without a problem, although the applicant might also want to hand write "NA" next to the item in the checklist.
 

wolfpack27616

Hero Member
Apr 10, 2010
292
77
Job Offer........
Pre-Assessed..
This is lengthy and spans multiple posts. Most get it and should thus SKIP this post and my additional post(s) that follow.
I had a few beers tonight- so here's a very brief response...

Yes- the posts are lengthy...Yes- Most get it...But NO, members should not skip that post of yours.... If I was the mod- I would sticky such posts...
 

Priyankita

Full Member
Aug 30, 2013
41
0
Category........
Visa Office......
NVDO
Job Offer........
Pre-Assessed..
App. Filed.......
23-Jun-2013
Med's Done....
20-Apr-2013
Interview........
21-May-2014
Passport Req..
30-Aug-2013
VISA ISSUED...
Hopefully soon!!!
I landed in Canada in July 2014 and so now, with the rule change, I qualify to apply for citizenship.

While filing the citizenship application, I noticed that if we have been out of Canada for more than 163 days in last 4 years then we need to provide PCC from that country.

I never left Canda after landing in July 2014 but if the period is 4 years then I was in India for more than 6 months in last 4 years. I.e I was in India for more that 6 months before I came to Canada. So, do I need PCC from India?

I I need PCC then I've a question about the address:

The address that is mentioned on my passport is no longer accessible to me as we have sold that house a year ago. My parents are also in Canada now and there is nobody in India who can help with address verification in case police go there to check.

Similar for my wife. Address on her passport is also old and no one from her family is there to handle query. Her passport is also about to expire next month.

Did anyone have similar issue? I understand that we need to put India address on the form. Which address that should be? Permanent address in India? Any address in India?
Is there any delay/problem if this address is not same as the address on the passport? Does anyone have any experience where the address on the passport and the address on the form were different?

I'm really desperate for any help that I can get. I'll try to call CGI but not sure if that will be of much help.

Hi, I am in a similar situation. I got my PR in Sept 2014 and to be able to now apply for the citizenship I need to provide PCC for the year 2013 when I was in India waiting for the PR. Did you already apply for the PCC? If so, did you mention in any of the PCC application forms the time duration you are applying the PCC for? I see a question in the police clearance reference form : Duration of stay in India. I lived all my life in India before moving to Canada. Do I need to say that or specify the year 2013 for which I need the PCC for? Any help will be very much appreciated.
 

kl_king

Full Member
Oct 20, 2017
26
15
Hi, I am in a similar situation. I got my PR in Sept 2014 and to be able to now apply for the citizenship I need to provide PCC for the year 2013 when I was in India waiting for the PR. Did you already apply for the PCC? If so, did you mention in any of the PCC application forms the time duration you are applying the PCC for? I see a question in the police clearance reference form : Duration of stay in India. I lived all my life in India before moving to Canada. Do I need to say that or specify the year 2013 for which I need the PCC for? Any help will be very much appreciated.
Hi @Priyankita my answer is, of course, subjective as someone who is still in the process of the application. I entered Canada directly as a PR in April 2014, and realised that I was very close to not having been in the my home country for 183 days when I was completing my application, so I simply waiting an extra week so that I could truthfully declare that no, I had not been in any one country in excess of this 183 days which would require a police certificate. I think that many members of this forum would always echo that it is better to be completely and scrupulously open and honest in completing these forms; the worst that you then might expect could be a request for clarification from IRCC. I wouldn't be completely surprised if I were later asked for a police certificate during my application, but I have sought to keep the process simple and streamlined. For the duration of my "stay" in my home country, I had visited Canada previously (years before my eligibility period) so I entered that date. I would suggest, if you never left India, perhaps putting your date of birth. Their system seems to automatically truncate dates outside of the eligibility period, but they do need some frame of reference for that!

I would suggest that, for your situation, you should either check yes to the question 10.b and provide a police certificate from India, or wait until you have been in Canada long enough that you can select no, having not been in India for the required 183 days. I would suggest a pessimistic calculation for this, for example, Canada does not count the day that you leave as a day of absence for the physical presence calculator, however, I personally did count the partial days in my home country when I was visiting during the eligibility period in determining this 183.

Good luck with your application!