Sorry, allow me to clarify: did you receive an AOR prior to receiving this letter? If not, then you should be entitled to a full refund, because an AOR means that IRCC have begun processing your application.
citizenship rejection-days bafore PR could not been confirmed
- Thread starter ditucha
- Start date
No, nothing just envelope the way I sent it but with extra paper about what is wrong with my application.
Sounds like it was returned so you can likely use the previous fee receipts. Might be best to call IRCC to check if the receipts are still valid.
Without any knowledge of the dates you claimed as a temporary worker, we're just stabbing in the dark. I've heard of too many problems here about IRCC not counting time as a visitor/temporary worker because they couldn't verify it, that's why I didn't apply until after I'd claimed 1095 days as PR.
You could try to contest this old application with your work permits, or honestly it just might be simpler to reapply with the new dates, and ideally you will have comfortably attained 1095 days as a PR by now.
OVERALL:
Whatever descriptive terms one employs, your application has, is in effect, been rejected for failing to document or establish eligibility, in regards to the physical presence qualification in particular. That does not completely close the door, for this application, but pursuing recourse, in effect challenging the decision to reject your application, is not likely to be a productive approach even if there is good cause, even if ultimately a challenge will be successful. Explaining this gets complicated.
I emphatically concur with suggestions you BEGIN by doing the online physical presence calculation again, anew, from scratch. Using the online version which will not let you count any days outside the relevant five year "eligibility period" and will not allow more than 365 days credit for pre-PR days in Canada.
The probability is you will need to recalculate WHEN to re-apply, and WAIT until when you can be certain you are not only entitled to a credit for enough days to meet the presence requirement, but that your GCMS records will be consistent with and corroborate that calculation, verifying what pre-PR status dates you are relying on. How difficult it will be to determine the latter depends on how well documented and how complicated, or not, your pre-PR status and presence history is.
Some Analysis and Related Observations:
Odds are high this is --
-- due to your error, or
-- because for some reason a period of time you included as having Temporary Resident status is not documented in your GCMS records
This is not about casting blame, but about trying to identify the problem and what recourse there may be. At the least there appears to be a discrepancy between your personal records, as set out in the application and presence calculation, and your GCMS records.
In particular, the more likely problems, apart from plain errors in entering dates, are:
-- somehow you included days prior to the five year eligibility period, which do not count
-- somehow you included more than 365 pre-PR days; maximum credit for pre-PR presence is 365, or stated another way, the applicant must have at least 730 days credit for days AFTER becoming a PR
-- -- for either of these, the recourse is to wait to re-apply with at least 730 days credit for time in Canada AFTER becoming a PR, and a total credit of at least 1095 based on credit only for days in Canada within the five year eligibility period, as of the date of the new application
and the most likely:-- there is a discrepancy between dates of qualifying pre-PR status in your personal records, as reported in the application and presence calculation you submitted, versus dates of status documented in your GCMS records
-- -- more practical recourse here is also to wait to re-apply when you are certain of your credits
-- -- that said, you could challenge the rejection if you are certain of your dates -- HOWEVER this approach is probably NOT practical and quite likely not worth pursuing, probably not even close to being worth it
The letter itself appears to indicate the issue is the last of these, that you have claimed credit for some days in Canada prior to becoming a PR for which your qualifying status cannot be verified by your GCMS records.
It is possible there has been some other kind of error, but other than a plain error in entering the information, that seems unlikely.
Unfortunately just to confirm this is about a discrepancy between your personal records and the GCMS records could require making a customized ATIP request that might be rather tricky to compose in a way that will get you the records you need to check this (could take multiple tries) . . . and that will take time (especially if it takes multiple tries) . . . and you might need help doing this (customized requests can require some sophistication). And all it would do is verify there is such a discrepancy . . . or, if not, by inference indicate that some other issue or error is involved without offering much of a clue as to what that might be.
Of course a copy of records verifying a discrepancy, and effectively identifying specifically what it is, would help to more precisely and reliably calculate when you have sufficient credit to re-apply. So it might be worth your while to initiate the procedure, to make a customized ATIP application for personal data maintained by IRCC regarding your pre-PR status in Canada.
In the meantime, however, as noted, best to begin by doing the online physical presence calculation again, anew, from scratch, and otherwise review your records trying to identify any plain data-entry type errors or to identify if there are any periods of pre-PR status for which your GCMS records might not match or confirm.
More Detailed Observations Regarding Discrepancy With GCMS Records:
The more common pitfalls seen in the anecdotal reporting relate to periods of implied status or periods of visitor status. As I have oft cautioned in other threads, relying on periods of implied status or visitor status can result in an application being "returned" attendant the completeness screening if the PR's GCMS records do not verify or document their status during those periods.
I seem to be among a minority, sometimes a rather small minority here (many if not most seem to be in the if-it-should-count-it-will-count camp, overlooking matters of procedure and proof), who caution applicants relying on pre-PR credit to be certain their pre-PR calculations are based on sufficiently documented status, in official records, in deciding WHEN to apply. The risk is that during the completeness screening process, BEFORE AOR, the applicant's GCMS records will not verify status, so the days will not count, and the application will be returned, in effect rejected, for a failure to meet the presence requirement.
And this appears to be your problem, even if how or why your accounting of status might not be corroborated or verified in GCMS is not clear and you do not clearly fit the more common scenarios.
For context, as I mentioned the more common scenarios where this arises are in regard to visitor or implied status:
-- Not all versions of implied status are equal, and in some cases a FN may continue to be in Canada with apparent implied status, or believing they have implied status, without actually having implied status or it is not otherwise documented in the GCMS record, with no negative consequences since whatever deviance from or shortfall in compliance there might have been, that is cured by the grant of further or new status
-- Not all visitor status is formally documented, and indeed for visa-exempt FNs their visitor status is more often not formally documented unless a Visitor Record is issued
That is, a client's GCMS records might not document or verify they had Temporary Resident status during those periods. Even though they had status. Even though it "should" count. But if the GCMS records do not verify that status, for that period of time, IRCC can conclude the applicant has not submitted sufficient proof of status for those periods . . . and, the burden of proof is on the applicant.
Since it "should" count, an applicant can challenge IRCC's decision to not count it, demand the application be processed, and proceed to prove status beyond a balance of probabilities, if they have the evidence. I think I mentioned, upfront, probably not worth challenging even if there is a case for challenging the rejection. Time, cost, hassle, uncertainty loaded with worry and stress, the negatives loom large.
A Normal Part of Application Screening:
While it appears some of the participants here are not familiar with this procedure, involving a preliminary screening of the citizenship applicant's physical presence calculation attendant the completeness screening of the application when it is initially opened, this is common. This has been reported by several others in this forum, and discussed here in various topics. As I mentioned, the more common pitfalls resulting in returned applications involve relying on undocumented visitor or implied status.
This is, in particular, something I have addressed in detail, cautioning prospective applicants to be aware that the completeness screening includes verification of the applicant's status in their GCMS records, and if for any reason there is a possible discrepancy with what the GCMS records show, to be sure to WAIT to apply with enough credit, based on days in Canada within the five year eligibility period, without counting those potentially undocumented (in GCMS) days.
The applicant can still include them in the calculation, and if the applicant is confident about status and presence should include them; but nonetheless the applicant should still wait long enough to apply, and have enough credit otherwise, it does not matter if IRCC acknowledges credit for those days in its completeness screening.