For all who Landed as PR (LESS than 5 years ago)

[mosaab]

I simply wrote N/A . Click the help button and it will tell you to fill it if you had other names only

Thank You, the new form really blinded me!

 

[wargo]

Thank You, the new form really blinded me!

They could have just left the old forms !! I don't see any need for this new form

 

[wargo]

I just found this, which still I don't think ti would answer our questions.

Q10: Do I need to declare absences prior to becoming a permanent resident?

A10: Yes, all absences from Canada during your eligibility period, the five (5) years preceding the date of your application, must be declared. Therefore your absences during your time as a temporary resident or protected person within the eligibility period must be declared as well.

 

[mosaab]

I just found this, which still I don't think ti would answer our questions.

Q10: Do I need to declare absences prior to becoming a permanent resident?

A10: Yes, all absences from Canada during your eligibility period, the five (5) years preceding the date of your application, must be declared. Therefore your absences during your time as a temporary resident or protected person within the eligibility period must be declared as well.

Thats why we have this thread up

 

[blueangel371115]

At least I'm not the only one. I feel like an idiot but some of the wording seems really confusing. I have ,best guess, 200 days outside Canada in a 5 year period. Which basically is many weekend, holiday or day trips home after landing and the time before landing. I've stayed max. 2 weeks at a time in the last five years aside from one summer (90 days). But some say it's days residing and not visiting you'd need a PCC. I landed in 2015 and did my PR clearance in 2013. So a little over half of those 200 some odd days are already under a cleared background check. So it seems stupid to send for a clearance again, when not actually counting those days I've spent maybe 30 total out of country. I wish it was a bit clearer or I was smarter because for me, and many like me, the PCC is almost redundant (at least for the FBI) and should be just Canada but I don't see that. My relevant period is from 10/2012- now and pretty much 2012-mid-2014 has already been checked. I was in Canada the majority of 2014 waiting for PR and got PR in early 2015. So do I send to the States where the visits are? Can somebody explain this? I don't mind doing it, I have nothing to hide but I don't want to take up time if I don't have to. Sorry if this has been asked a whole ton already. Thanks for letting me vent a bit.

 

[dpenabill]

There is a question asks for other names I have used, I think it's number 6. If I have never used any other names beside my legal name do i need to write my name again or just NA?!

Item 6 does not merely ask for "other" names. It requires the applicant to list ALL names, including name at birth.

A proper response to item 6 will thus include at least one name, if the applicant has only ever used one name, which obviously would then be the same name as listed in item 4.

This form is different from previous citizenship application forms in many respects. It is critically important to carefully read and follow the instructions.

For someone who entered NA, I'm guessing IRCC will figure it out, but the item clearly states to list ALL names used.

 

[spyfy]

At least I'm not the only one. I feel like an idiot but some of the wording seems really confusing. I have ,best guess, 200 days outside Canada in a 5 year period. Which basically is many weekend, holiday or day trips home after landing and the time before landing. I've stayed max. 2 weeks at a time in the last five years aside from one summer (90 days). But some say it's days residing and not visiting you'd need a PCC. I landed in 2015 and did my PR clearance in 2013. So a little over half of those 200 some odd days are already under a cleared background check. So it seems stupid to send for a clearance again, when not actually counting those days I've spent maybe 30 total out of country. I wish it was a bit clearer or I was smarter because for me, and many like me, the PCC is almost redundant (at least for the FBI) and should be just Canada but I don't see that. My relevant period is from 10/2012- now and pretty much 2012-mid-2014 has already been checked. I was in Canada the majority of 2014 waiting for PR and got PR in early 2015. So do I send to the States where the visits are? Can somebody explain this? I don't mind doing it, I have nothing to hide but I don't want to take up time if I don't have to. Sorry if this has been asked a whole ton already. Thanks for letting me vent a bit.

• Go four years back from the date of application (that should be some time in October 2013). NOT five years!
• From exactly the day that was four years ago (i.e. currently that is October 11, 2013), count the days you were in the US.
• It does not matter why you were in the US, how long each trip was and if that was before or after becoming a Permanent Resident
• So again, simply count all days in the US in the last four years.
• If the number you get is 183 or more, you need a PCC

(Do that for every country you have been to, not just the US of course. But do it SEPARATELY for every country)

Any background check that happened during your PR application is irrelevant now. This is frustrating but it is so for the following reasons:

• While both for PR and Citizenship, there is a background check, the checks are done with different standards, e.g. the kind of offences that are a problem are different.
• That means the old background check was not the same as this one
• They would take forever to find your old police certificate. It is probably in some central archive, whereas your citizenship application is processed locally according to your place of residence. They have no access to it (or it would take them half a year at IRCC speed to find it)
• Even if they found the PCC, assuming that your PR application took 6 months to process, the old PCC only covers the period that was half a year before you became a PR. That point in time is more than four years ago for most (but not all) applicants

That's the reasons why the old background check is useless to them.

 

[blueangel371115]

Perfect, thanks. No one really explained it and I saw conflicting comments/posts. I was getting frustrated. Can they do the check here and send it ( or I can mail it) or do I go to the states? I mean just to take the fingerprints. Thanks again.

 

[spyfy]

Perfect, thanks. No one really explained it and I saw conflicting comments/posts. I was getting frustrated. Can they do the check here and send it ( or I can mail it) or do I go to the states? I mean just to take the fingerprints. Thanks again.

I don't know the details about obtaining an FBI certificate. There is a detailed explanation on the CIC website though
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/information/security/police-cert/index.asp

 

[blueangel371115]

I'll check it out.

 

[wargo]

Item 6 does not merely ask for "other" names. It requires the applicant to list ALL names, including name at birth.

A proper response to item 6 will thus include at least one name, if the applicant has only ever used one name, which obviously would then be the same name as listed in item 4.

This form is different from previous citizenship application forms in many respects. It is critically important to carefully read and follow the instructions.

For someone who entered NA, I'm guessing IRCC will figure it out, but the item clearly states to list ALL names used.

I don't think you are right. if you click the help button it would say :

If you have ever used any other names other than the one being requested in your grant citizenship application, print them in chart.

So clearly they need only other names if they are different from the name listed previously in the application. So putting N/A is the correct answer I think

 

[spyfy]

I don't think you are right. if you click the help button it would say :

If you have ever used any other names other than the one being requested in your grant citizenship application, print them in chart.

So clearly they need only other names if they are different from the name listed previously in the application. So putting N/A is the correct answer I think

Yes, this is the correct answer IMHO. You only need to provide names that are not listed in the previous questions. If you click the "Help" button in the form this is stated explicitly.

 

[mumbai1985]

Hi guys,

In all places where they are asking you to fill reason, do we put N/A or just leave blank?

For example, if you do not have passport, provide reason below . If I have all passports listed, do I just keep the reason field blank or put N/A there?

 

[clearly]

I can't apply right now, so I'll just hope they'll correct this before it's my turn. For those who want to apply right now, this is what I would do:

Truthfully answer the question with "Yes". Then, after printing, add in handwriting "See explanation on separate page". Then, on a separate page write:

"Explanation regarding Question 9(c): As you can see in the list in question 10 (a), I resided outside Canada during the eligibility period. This is why I correctly chose "Yes" as an Answer to Question 9(c). You ask to then provide form CIT0177. However, this form does not apply to me. Yes, I resided outside Canada but No, I do not intend to claim any of that time as residence in the sense of Crown Servants working abroad. This very rare case does not apply to me and this is why I do not provide that form."

I'm doing the same and simply writing "See 10a - Pre-PR Status" as 10a immediately under it lists where you lived. And writing underneath the form name to include "Not Applicable"

 

[itsmyid]

If they fix the calculator I think all people who landed no later than 3 and a half years ago will not need a PC. Also, if they fix the calculator then everybody will be released from that because the eligibility period would change.

It was already answered in the FAQ section why the requirement for PC is for 4 years, someone actually posted that part here.... so, no need to keep guessing here