I actually received a call today from IRCC from this number 1-888-242-2100, I thought this to be some spam call and hanged up the phone. I googled later to find that this is actually IRCCs contact number. I am not sure if the CBSA officer started a formal process.
May be I should call IRCC and check?
CAUTION: We Are NOT Experts.
No one here (which definitely includes me) should be relied upon to be an expert.
It is quite possible, perhaps likely,
your situation is outside the common procedures most of us are familiar with.
I doubt any of us here can reliably assess what your situation is. Will address this more below.
Moreover, it is difficult to know for sure if the telephone call was legitimate. Scammers have developed ways to mask the call and display other numbers. That said, given your relatively recent PoE experience the odds are the call was legitimate. In any event,
the 1-888-242-2100 number is the correct number to call (Monday to Friday 8 to 4; start early in the day as the lines tend to get very busy)
to make an inquiry about your status.
My sense leans heavily toward doing that, making the telephone call and inquire about your status. Or use the web form available at the IRCC website. My sense is to at least be sure IRCC has current contact information for you.
My sense is that trying to dodge contact from IRCC would NOT be helpful. Probably counterproductive. But as noted, and it demands repeating with emphasis:
I am NO expert. If you can afford and find a qualified immigration lawyer (free consultations tend to be worth no more than what you pay for), that might be the better approach.
In any event, I disagree with the "
do nothing,"
head-in-the-sand approach. I am not much confident about this. I admit I am rather uncertain about how to best approach this. But I highly doubt anyone else here knows any better. To my view, contacting IRCC, and being sure IRCC has correct contact information for you, will NOT constitute a transaction triggering a RO compliance examination (in contrast, say, to making an application for a new PR card or leaving Canada and arriving at a PoE again). If there is to be a formal process against you based on a breach of the RO, my impression is that has already been triggered, and if so better to deal with it rather than avoid IRCC.
BUT it demands repeating and emphasizing that I do not know . . . but also repeating and emphasizing I am highly skeptical of anyone else here knowing.
Some Context:
Given the relatively small breach of the Residency Obligation (it appears you are 40 days short), and it very easily being said that Covid-19 is at least partially responsible for your delay in coming to Canada to settle, my
NON-expert sense is that even if IRCC formally follows through with an official RO compliance examination (or . . . will get to the alternatives below), the odds should be very good you will still be OK.
BUT . . . I would have guessed much the same about the PoE examination. That is, that despite being 40 days late in getting back to Canada, relative to RO compliance, I would have guessed a waive through the PoE or perhaps some questions in Secondary followed by an admonition. And if not, then the examining officer would have issued a 44(1) Report for Inadmissibility, based on a breach of the RO, and referred you to another officer (who technically is acting as the "Minister's Delegate") who would decide whether to issue a Departure Order or dismiss the 44(1) Report based on H&C reasons. And you would have gotten a copy of the paperwork.
Leading to what happened at the PoE upon arrival . . .
What Happened at the PoE Upon Arrival:
It is possible, perhaps likely, the PoE CBSA officer initiated a referral to IRCC to investigate your compliance with the Residency Obligation.
This is NOT common. And there are other possibilities. Including the possibility of an irregular procedure.
Moreover, as I have already noted, given Covid-19 and the fact you arrived in Canada with approximately two years left before your PR card expires (which as others said is not relevant in calculating RO compliance; but it can influence how PoE officers approach a returning PR), and just 40 days short of being in compliance with the Residency Obligation (relying on your calculation), my guess would have been to expect a pass without being "
reported."
I just used "
reported" in the lower case and put it in quotations to highlight the difference between being issued the 44(1) Report for Inadmissibility, due to a failure to comply with the RO,
in contrast to an officer initiating a referral to IRCC, which many might describe to be a "report," or refer to this as being "reported."
As I noted, this procedure is not common. And while it has popped up in some official decisions where we can see accounts of actual cases, examples are infrequent and difficult to find in the databases of IAD decisions. In the meantime, forum anecdotal reporting about this procedure is rare, sporadic, and the accounts are typically sketchy and not particularly reliable, noting that among the scarcity of such reporting, many of those affected are not well-acquainted with the formal procedures and not good reporters about what occurred.
BUT it warrants emphasizing there are other possibilities. Including potential irregular procedures, such as one officer issuing a 44(1) Report without giving you a copy, perhaps because there was no other officer available to act as the Minister's Delegate, so the "Report" itself was in a sense incomplete. Requiring a follow-up. This leads to all sorts of contingencies, noting that if this is was what happened, the follow-up should be from CBSA not IRCC.
Among other possibilities. Regarding which there is nothing to be gained speculating about. There is only one possibility that matters, and that is what procedure actually took place in your case. And to find out, you will need to contact IRCC. Well, I should say, to find out sooner than waiting to find out, some time later, if IRCC has proceeded in a direction that is inimical to your interests . . . which, for example, could make getting some leeway, some H&C leniency, more difficult.
Note, for example, if a 44(1) Report has been issued, and is outstanding (still subject to review by a Minister's Delegate or perhaps by IRCC), every day that goes by you are more and more in breach of the RO. Since the days you are in Canada after a 44(1) Report has been issued do NOT count toward compliance . . . and indeed, this could mean a decision-maker also does NOT give you credit for days left on the calendar up to the fifth year anniversary of your landing.
LOTS of UNKNOWNS. More than a few contingencies.
OVERALL . . . KEY TAKE-AWAY: Most of what I say above is to explain how it is you are in a situation that is beyond the scope of what this forum can reliably address.
If you find out more about your situation, and particularly if you are subject to further proceedings potentially leading to the loss of your PR status, the forum may be able to help . . . once more details are known.
In the meantime, I have not delved into "why" things went differently than we usually see. There's plenty we could talk about in this regard, but that will not illuminate what you should do, which is what is important now.
I have not put any emphasis on the PoE officer's use of the word "appeal," even though that could be a rather significant clue about what the officer intended to do regardless what actual procedure took place. The key is that the status of your case is NOT clear. There is little to be gained by speculating about this, other than enough to recognize the RISK a process has already been triggered which could result in the loss of PR status.
Regarding the latter, one final observation: PR Residency Obligation H&C cases are very different than H&C cases in other contexts. While it is not explicitly stated as such, what the decision-maker perceives the PR *deserves* can have a lot of influence. Avoiding contact from IRCC is NOT likely to help the *deserves* aspect of your H&C case, if you are put into a situation where you need to more formally make the H&C case in order to keep your PR status.
I did soft-landing in Canada in Sept '17, stayed for a week and went back to India. I couldn't come back due to personal reasons and finally moved to Canada in October'20. At the point of entry this time, I was questioned regarding my residency obligation by a CBSA officer. I was allowed to enter but she suggested that I may have to appeal on Humanitarian and compassionate grounds later.
I am planning to stay in Canada for the next 2 years.
Considering 5 years from landing date, I'd be about 40 days short on meeting the residency obligation of 730 days. However, If I consider the PR card expiry date(which is Oct'22) I should be able to fulfil the obligation.
Should I contact IRCC now and request for extension(mentioning the extenuating circumstances) or wait for 2 years(i.e. until my PR card expires) and then apply for PR renewal.
I actually received a call today from IRCC from this number 1-888-242-2100, I thought this to be some spam call and hanged up the phone. I googled later to find that this is actually IRCCs contact number. I am not sure if the CBSA officer started a formal process.
May be I should call IRCC and check?
