My consultant missed reporting an employment on my application form (IMM 5444) which was mailed in. I have not received an AOR yet. How should I get the application corrected ?
Option1: mail in a letter marked urgent (consultant and I sign it). Downside: It might not get open before they issue PR card ... so officer won't get to see it before making a decision.
Option2: Consultant submits a webform. Is a webform allowed ? Does a webform after a mailed application look suspicious causing Secondary review or local office ? Any experience ?
FYI, at the time of mailed of application, I had already completed few weeks above the RO requirement.
I generally avoid challenging authorized professionals (with the caveat that I trust lawyers more than consultants) because I am NO expert and no where near as qualified as any lawyer or AUTHORIZED consultant.
So, generally, I defer to the professional's advice about how to proceed. Personally I am biased against consultants and if I needed professional assistance or advice, I would go to a lawyer not a consultant. But, even as to consultants (authorized consultants of course), generally, with some exceptions, I do not challenge or contradict their advice.
What I offer is
For-What-It's-Worth, for your consideration . . . not to challenge anything a professional is advising.
What I offer below is also based on the assumption that you are IN Canada and currently well-settled in Canada. If this assumption does not apply, things can be more complicated.
WHEN to SEND SUPPLEMENTAL Information:
NOTE that there is no practical way to supplement an application that has been submitted UNTIL AFTER there is an Acknowledgement of Receipt (AOR). Which, for most PR card applications, is when a processing agent makes a decision on it as well.
So, you are correct that even if you send in supplemental information for your application, it is very likely (almost certain) the application will be opened and at least preliminarily assessed WITHOUT consideration given to the supplemental information. At that stage the decision-making is either an APPROVAL which in turn sends the application into the processing stream for issuing and delivering a new card to the PR,
OR the application is then put into one of several possible non-routine processing tracks. If the latter happens, the supplemental information should eventually catch up to the application BUT the better practice, by far, is to wait to get AOR and then submit the supplemental information including a reference to the file number for that specific application (not just the individual PR's name and client number). That is the only way to be sure that supplemental information will end up in the proper file.
In the meantime, NOT all mistakes are created equal:
To what extent this omission is a "problem," or could be a problem, depends on many factors. And likewise, IF it is a problem, what sort of problem can vary considerably, and what sort of problem it is will, likewise, depend on many factors and details. (Which are all aspects of this the consultant knows far, far better than I or anyone here.)
PRs make lots and lots of mistakes. ALL PRs make some mistakes. IRCC recognizes this and generally handles these situations far, far more competently and fairly than many realize.
So, the nature and scope of the mistake, or omission, matters.
Many times it will be no big deal, none at all, and even if the mistake is big enough to trigger questions, the worst case scenario then is usually the applicant getting a request for additional information or documentation. Of course some mistakes, and perhaps especially omissions, can result in IRCC having concerns or even serious concerns about the individual PR's credibility, or in blatantly egregious situations result in misrepresentation allegations, even formal charges. But unless IRCC has cause to be overtly suspicious, the worst case scenario is non-routine processing which may or may not include requests for additional information or documents.
In any event URGENCY is probably of little or no use anyway. Whether this will trigger problem level scrutiny is probably now out of your hands. Unless the discrepancy between what is reported in the application and what the actual facts are rises to a level indicating fraud (that is, it is rather suspicious), OTHERWISE the range in its effect goes from NONE (PR card is approved, issued, and put into a delivery track) to processing which will give you some opportunity to EXPLAIN . . . and, actually, even if outright fraud is suspected, you would still get an opportunity to correct the record and explain your mistakes . . . leading to . . . this is YOUR mistake . . .
. . . in particular, it is important to recognize, acknowledge, and ACCEPT, that it is NOT possible to make a PR application in which the professional, consultant or lawyer, "missed" reporting information that should be reported. To the extent there are errors or omissions in the application, that is foremost and for certain
the applicant's mistake.
To whatever extent the consultant's actions contributed to YOUR mistake, that can be part of any explanation for the omission, but the PR is the person who signs the completed application
VERIFYING the information in the application. The PR herself, or himself, is the one individual accountable for the accuracy and completeness of the information submitted. (Apparently some professionals may still engage in a practice pursuant to which PRs sign the form before it is fully completed . . . that is something I will and do challenge . . . PRs should NOT do that . . . and I will emphasize that this is for sure a mistake, by the PR, and one that can be very serious.)
So, best to start with OWNING that (apparently)
YOU "
missed reporting an employment on [your]
application form (IMM 5444)." No matter how much the consultant contributed to it.
Approaching these processes from any other perspective risks compromising your credibility, which is one of the most important factors influencing how things go.
OTHERWISE . . . . again . . . NOT all mistakes are created equal.
And, indeed, many, many PRs make mistakes in their applications to IRCC, and the vast majority of those mistakes are NOT a problem. This will either NOT be a problem . . . or, you will have an opportunity to submit supplemental information AND an explanation for how the mistake happened.
A concluding observation:
In regards to your statement "
FYI, at the time of mailed of application, I had already completed few weeks above the RO requirement."
It is NOT clear what you mean here. Without wrestling with the variables, a potentially key factor is the obvious: to what extent you are well settled in Canada, including consideration of just how much you have been IN Canada during the previous five years (or since becoming a PR if that was less than five years ago). The impression is that you are among those
cutting-it-close in that you have been outside Canada more than IN Canada during the last five years. If this is the case, a "
couple weeks" does not carry a lot of weight here. (For someone who was usually outside Canada, for any periods of time in doubt it is reasonable to infer they were likewise outside Canada, that is, to infer they were where they usually were.)
A lot of other factors will influence how it goes, but if indeed you have spent more time outside Canada than IN Canada during the last five years, the RISK of non-routine processing goes up and it will especially go up if the overall situation does not indicate you are well settled in Canada.
