This is a delayed response (I am not here anywhere near every day) but there is still time . . .
Overview: Make no mistake, you have received a Procedural Fairness Letter and misrepresentation is very much at issue, probably the main issue.
Physical presence is also a key issue, of course, but only if IRCC accepts there was no misrepresentation.
In regards to whether a fully responsive submission together with an explanation emphasizing this was an honest mistake, an oversight, will suffice, that likely depends on the particular circumstances, not the least of which is how many trips were not disclosed and how many days were spent outside Canada, and how this affects the calculation of physical presence overall.
I recently received a request from IRCC stating that I answered “No” to the question about leaving Canada during my 5-year eligibility period. However, their records show that I did travel outside Canada.
This was an honest mistake on my part, and I did not intend to provide incorrect information.
IRCC is now asking me to provide:
- Proof of all travel (departures and arrivals)
- A complete travel history for the eligibility period
Assuming you did not report any travel history in the application, in effect not providing information for the physical presence calculation . . .
Whether to lawyer-up is a question you probably want to seriously consider. I address this further below.
I largely concur with most of the observations posted by
@Seym except
By being apologetic, truthful and precise is your answer, chances are IRCC will just chalk it as "careless applicant".
(maybe, but maybe not . . . see further comments below) and
how you feel about misrepresentation risk is very personal . . .
The risk is personal, as it depends on the circumstances in the particular individual's case, and sure, how
you feel about it is personal (whether to incur the costs of hiring a lawyer or take your chances without a lawyer's help) but to be clear the nature and scope of the risk does not depend on how you feel about it.
I fully concur in this:
. . . and how to act to "avoid misrepresentation" is probably something better discussed with a paid lawyer
In particular, unless the omitted information was minimal, it would be a good idea to lawyer-up. If you made numerous trips outside Canada, or were outside Canada for a lengthy period of time (more than a month at a time, particularly if more than once), you almost certainly want to at least obtain a paid-for, in-depth consultation (with a lawyer experienced in immigration, not a consultant).
In regards to the observations by
@Ross88:
How do you mess up answering an extremely simple yes/no question? Respond to IRCC ASAP with the information they want. No point thinking about consequences. What's done is done.
That response is substantively well off the mark even though its tone and connotations (that there could be a serious issue) appear to be well on the mark.
In particular, if you spent more than two consecutive nights outside Canada during your eligibility period, this was not a failure to answer a "
simple yes/no question" but a failure to accurately report information in regards to meeting the physical presence requirement. It is impossible to meaningfully follow the instructions for making a citizenship application without recognizing that the calculation of physical presence is a key part of the application, and that periods of time outside Canada must be reported in the application for that calculation.
There is no need to respond to IRCC ASAP. Timely, yes, but otherwise how quickly you respond does not matter. So submit a response within the time period the request states. But otherwise your focus should be on submitting all the information requested, completely and accurately, and otherwise explaining (honestly) how or why you failed to truthfully disclose your travel history.
Take into consideration the consequences: if IRCC determines there was misrepresentation that will result in the application being denied and a five year prohibition. Consider the consequences even if that is for no other reason than to help you decide whether or not to obtain a lawyer's help.
In a sense "
What's done is done." But whether what is done was a mistake or was misrepresentation is in question. You are on notice that IRCC has identified a discrepancy which could lead to the conclusion you made a material misrepresentation of fact. You have an opportunity to submit information that could influence whether IRCC concludes this was a mistake or misrepresentation.
What Are The Risks?
I cannot say what the chances are that IRCC will conclude this was a mistake or misrepresentation. Again, that likely depends on the particular details in your circumstances.
As I also noted above with emphasis, what you have received is a
Procedural Fairness Letter (PFL), putting you on notice that IRCC has identified a suspected discrepancy between the facts you reported in your application and the actual facts. That is, to put it plainly and simply, an allegation of misrepresentation. This communication from IRCC gives you the opportunity not just to submit an accurate account of the facts but to explain this was a mistake, an oversight, or as you frame it "
an honest mistake."
How believable is your assertion that this was an honest mistake?
Just asserting it was an honest mistake, in conjunction with submitting a completely accurate travel history, may be persuasive enough in some situations. If, for example, you overlooked the fact that you had made a day trip to the U.S., even a few day trips, or that you overlooked one longer but not particularly long trip elsewhere (for a week or even three perhaps), and otherwise, that as of the day you applied, after deducting days outside Canada your physical presence was still more than 1150 or so days during your eligibility period.
The information you have shared here, however, is no where near sufficient to evaluate the risk that your claim this was "
an honest mistake" will be persuasive. There is no need to persuade anyone here, of course; no need to share enough information in this forum to persuade me or anyone else here. What matters is what will persuade the total stranger bureaucrats who evaluate your submission.
Hard to say whether the risk of a misrepresentation decision in your particular circumstances warrants the cost of employing a lawyer.
What is at stake . . . what is at stake is not just the application being denied (a finding of misrepresentation is a sufficient stand alone basis for denying the application, even if you otherwise meet all the eligibility requirements), but a finding of misrepresentation would also result in a five year prohibition (meaning you would not be eligible for citizenship again until at least 2031).
Should I be worried about misrepresentation?
If by "
worried" you mean should you approach this by including more than just travel history and proof of travel, that is, to submit additional information constituting an explanation showing this was an oversight, or merely an erroneous click. Yes.
As noted, you have received a PFL putting you on notice that you submitted an application in which you reported inaccurate facts (asserting you did not travel outside Canada even though you had) and in which you failed to disclose your travel history outside Canada.
As I have noted, I cannot say what the chances are that IRCC will conclude this was a mistake or misrepresentation. That will depend on the nature and scope of the discrepancy, in the context of your particular circumstances, in conjunction with what you submit in response to this PFL.
If the extent of the discrepancy is minimal, submission of an accurate and complete correction in conjunction with a believable explanation this was due to an oversight or misunderstanding, that may suffice. Generally, however, depending on what is at stake compared to what the individual can afford, among other considerations, getting a PFL signals time to lawyer-up. A PFL signals there is a dispositive issue posing a potentially negative outcome if the applicant does not sufficiently resolve that issue.
You may not need a lawyer if you merely failed to report a couple or three day trips to the U.S., perhaps even a two or three week trip abroad, for example, and whatever you failed to report does not significantly change the physical presence calculation, in which case, as
@Seym put it, "
being apologetic, truthful and precise is your answer, chances are IRCC will just chalk it as 'careless applicant'," then no need to get help from a lawyer.
If, in contrast, you failed to disclose numerous trips or lengthy periods of time outside Canada, and your explanation amounts to little more than "
this was [trust me] an honest mistake," it is probably time to lawyer-up.
I will offer some further observations about the nature and scope of discrepancies, in regards to what can be determined to be misrepresentation (may take some time; I'm old and slow).
