The form does not request our permission to check our driving or health records. I don't believe IRCC would do that or have the authority to unilaterally carry out such checks without our explicit permission.
For post-C6 applicants who received AOR, did you use PR card as ID?
- Thread starter duplex
- Start date
lpc19800
Champion Member
- May 21, 2013
- 114
- Category........
- Visa Office......
- CPP-O
- NOC Code......
- 1223
- Job Offer........
- Pre-Assessed..
- App. Filed.......
- January 14 2013
- AOR Received.
- February 24 2013
- Med's Request
- November 13, 2013
- Med's Done....
- December 5, 2013
- Interview........
- Waived: RPRF requested: November 13, 2013
- Passport Req..
- Visa exempt
- VISA ISSUED...
- January 6, 2014
- LANDED..........
- January 29, 2014
Ugh - ok i'm confused - and I'm sure someone else has noticed:
- in the application package instructions it mentions ID twice - once 'if you have a passport....' and a second time when it says 'personal identification' nearer the bottom.
however in the document checklist, it just mentions ID once.
I sent - passport copies (I've had 2 in the past 5 years) and Ontario driver's license.
I didn't send PR card because it didn't ask for it and my driver's license met the criteria and was listed as an acceptable form of ID.
My rationale was that they can use my Client ID to look up my PR records and they said Passport(s) + 1 ID
My application arrived Oct 25 so I guess we shall just have to wait and see if it's returned or if I get AOR :-S
- in the application package instructions it mentions ID twice - once 'if you have a passport....' and a second time when it says 'personal identification' nearer the bottom.
however in the document checklist, it just mentions ID once.
I sent - passport copies (I've had 2 in the past 5 years) and Ontario driver's license.
I didn't send PR card because it didn't ask for it and my driver's license met the criteria and was listed as an acceptable form of ID.
My rationale was that they can use my Client ID to look up my PR records and they said Passport(s) + 1 ID
My application arrived Oct 25 so I guess we shall just have to wait and see if it's returned or if I get AOR :-S
You should be just fine. You have provided two IDs, one your valid passport copy and second your driver's licence which is a valid ID as per CIC. Relax and wait for your AOR.
As StrongBad has said, he got AOR and he submitted the following:
1. PR Card front and back and
2. Copy of all the Passport pages (including blanks)
3. Copy of COPR
https://www.canadavisa.com/canada-immigration-discussion-board/threads/october-2017-citizenship-applicants.520058/page-52#post-6477345
CoPR is probably because of the first version requirement on Oct 11, which was removed on Oct 12. He/she didn't include drivers license or health card or any other ID.
From his/her case, we can say that PR card can be used as ID. Since CoPR is not one piece of ID (at least no photo), so he/she had submitted passport + PR card and got the AOR.
Let's wait and see what happens with others (and myself).
1. PR Card front and back and
2. Copy of all the Passport pages (including blanks)
3. Copy of COPR
https://www.canadavisa.com/canada-immigration-discussion-board/threads/october-2017-citizenship-applicants.520058/page-52#post-6477345
CoPR is probably because of the first version requirement on Oct 11, which was removed on Oct 12. He/she didn't include drivers license or health card or any other ID.
From his/her case, we can say that PR card can be used as ID. Since CoPR is not one piece of ID (at least no photo), so he/she had submitted passport + PR card and got the AOR.
Let's wait and see what happens with others (and myself).
Key take-aways:
For those applicants who relied on the PR card as one of their forms of identification in conjunction with a copy of passport bio-pages, it is WAIT-and-SEE.
For those who have not yet made an application, obviously the better approach is to NOT rely on the PR card as a form of identification, but to submit passport plus one other form of government issued photo identification, or two pieces of government issued photo identification.
One anecdotal report is little assurance the PR card suffices as identification. It may. But there are more indications to the contrary. However one weighs the available information, it is at least UNCERTAIN, and for prospective applicants, better to avoid uncertainty.
Further observations:
As I have observed elsewhere, I concur in the observations about why the PR card SHOULD be considered an acceptable form of identification (and indeed is by other government bodies). But no matter how strong the reasons are in favour of why it should be, what really matters is IRCC internal policy and practice. And but for one isolated anecdotal report, the indications tend to suggest NO, not accepted.
It warrants noting that some participants above have referenced some reasons why IRCC might have such a policy or practice. After all, IRCC wants to verify the applicant is who he or she says she is, generally, not just who he or she is in IRCC's own records.
It also warrants observing that IRCC may accept the PR card for some applicants, depending on other factors and circumstances, and not accept it as sufficient identification for others. It would be odd for this distinction to apply in the completeness check, since the completeness check is almost certainly done by checking off specific items as included or not included. But again, what matters is IRCC's internal policy and practice, and IRCC has posted nothing in the citizenship related information it provides which says that a PR card is accepted as identification. That is a clue. Only a clue since where IRCC does list forms of acceptable identification, those lists are generally not exclusive.
Another aspect of this warranting some attention is the legibility issue. There have been previous indications that scanning and printing sometimes results in a copy which is noticeably different in size from the original, and no matter how readily read these copies can be rejected as illegible. Copies are necessarily not the exact size of the original (manufacturers of copying devices are required to incorporate this as a fixed feature), but those differences in size are minute. But significant differences in size (this tends to happen when the document is scanned and later printed) can result in the item being rejected as illegible.
Edit to add: it is also possible there are some vagaries in how IRCC completeness checks are in fact applied during this transition period while staff are training and learning and adapting to the changes. Thus, for example, isolated or few anecdotal reports will not offer a reliable basis for concluding what IRCC's actual policy or practice is . . . it will probably take some time before the actual policy becomes clear.
For those applicants who relied on the PR card as one of their forms of identification in conjunction with a copy of passport bio-pages, it is WAIT-and-SEE.
For those who have not yet made an application, obviously the better approach is to NOT rely on the PR card as a form of identification, but to submit passport plus one other form of government issued photo identification, or two pieces of government issued photo identification.
One anecdotal report is little assurance the PR card suffices as identification. It may. But there are more indications to the contrary. However one weighs the available information, it is at least UNCERTAIN, and for prospective applicants, better to avoid uncertainty.
Further observations:
As I have observed elsewhere, I concur in the observations about why the PR card SHOULD be considered an acceptable form of identification (and indeed is by other government bodies). But no matter how strong the reasons are in favour of why it should be, what really matters is IRCC internal policy and practice. And but for one isolated anecdotal report, the indications tend to suggest NO, not accepted.
It warrants noting that some participants above have referenced some reasons why IRCC might have such a policy or practice. After all, IRCC wants to verify the applicant is who he or she says she is, generally, not just who he or she is in IRCC's own records.
It also warrants observing that IRCC may accept the PR card for some applicants, depending on other factors and circumstances, and not accept it as sufficient identification for others. It would be odd for this distinction to apply in the completeness check, since the completeness check is almost certainly done by checking off specific items as included or not included. But again, what matters is IRCC's internal policy and practice, and IRCC has posted nothing in the citizenship related information it provides which says that a PR card is accepted as identification. That is a clue. Only a clue since where IRCC does list forms of acceptable identification, those lists are generally not exclusive.
Another aspect of this warranting some attention is the legibility issue. There have been previous indications that scanning and printing sometimes results in a copy which is noticeably different in size from the original, and no matter how readily read these copies can be rejected as illegible. Copies are necessarily not the exact size of the original (manufacturers of copying devices are required to incorporate this as a fixed feature), but those differences in size are minute. But significant differences in size (this tends to happen when the document is scanned and later printed) can result in the item being rejected as illegible.
Edit to add: it is also possible there are some vagaries in how IRCC completeness checks are in fact applied during this transition period while staff are training and learning and adapting to the changes. Thus, for example, isolated or few anecdotal reports will not offer a reliable basis for concluding what IRCC's actual policy or practice is . . . it will probably take some time before the actual policy becomes clear.
To be honest i don't know why these guys can't get their act together and "control" their borders just like other countries do...the requirement is physical presence only...so its not mandatory for citizenship purposes to "drive" or "go to a doctor" or "go to work"!!
How about stamping the passports of all PR's on the way in and way out at all borders (including land borders)...just like 3rd world countries do.. rather than to rely on a health card or driver's license to try and guess if someone was in the country or not...
Y'all seem to suggest that the DL or Health Card are used as residency checks. This is not the case. They serve the sole purpose of proving your identity. The idea is "It might be possible to forge a single government-issued ID, but if someone has a Passport, a DL and a Health Card, one can reasonably believe that they are who they claim they are".
Note that IRCC is legally not even allowed to access your DL record or your HC record. First of all, DL and HC records are administered provincially and the amount of data that is shared between the provinces and the federal agencies is limited. But most importantly, and that is the actual point: IRCC is not allowed to access your DL or HC record unless you give written consent. Please note that on the Citizenship application form you need to give explicit written consent for IRCC to be allowed to access your CBSA records (border crossings) and your CRA file (tax filing obligation). If IRCC actually accessed DL and HC records without written consent by the applicant that would be a blatant breach of privacy laws and rest assured immigration lawyers across the country would sue the hell out of IRCC. Particularly Health Records are extremely sensitive information and therefore access to those files is particularly restricted.
Long story short:
- IRCC is not accessing your DL and HC files
- To suggest that if you don't provide DL and/or HC you are robbing IRCC of an additional way to confirm physical presence is therefore wrong.
- In consequence, to suggest that not providing these makes you more prone to an RQ is also wrong.
- All this of course doesn't change the fact that DL and HC are two rather convenient IDs to use as the required ID documents in the citizenship application.
It is a recurring debate every time the Citizenship Act gets changed that exit checks would very much simplify the Citizenship Application process. However the government has frequently clarified that they will not start implementing exit checks. The reason is that if they were introduced, basically every international airport in Canada would need to be refurbished to add additional border checkpoints etc (just like, for example, EU countries have).To be honest i don't know why these guys can't get their act together and "control" their borders just like other countries do...the requirement is physical presence only...so its not mandatory for citizenship purposes to "drive" or "go to a doctor" or "go to work"!!
How about stamping the passports of all PR's on the way in and way out at all borders (including land borders)...just like 3rd world countries do.. rather than to rely on a health card or driver's license to try and guess if someone was in the country or not...
Also, independent of the question if exit checks should be introduced or not: Passport stamps are really unnecessary. IRCC simply accesses the CBSA data which is way more efficient and reliable than passport stamps. So this is not about "do passports get stamped or not", but simply about "do passports get checked/scanned when exiting the country".
I applied 11 OCT and used following IDs:
PR Card
Drivers License
Land Document with Picture
No passpport and explained why. But havent travelled a minute out of Ontario since 2010 so that wont be issue.
BUT STILL, CIC WILL STILL CAN RETURN APP OVER ANYTHING LIKE:
during my eligibility OCT 2012 to OCT 2017 i have left 1 yr gap on employment history so i suspect they might return that app but i realized i reapplied another complete app on 18 OCT 2017 with cover letter explaining if they will mind that error the complete one is 18 oct with no error. So i am little bit restless until they touch 18 oct i dont know but just praying during this rough time to be in good hands.
looking to hear those who got AOR but applied under C6 but have error on gap DATES about employment or Addresses.
PR Card
Drivers License
Land Document with Picture
No passpport and explained why. But havent travelled a minute out of Ontario since 2010 so that wont be issue.
BUT STILL, CIC WILL STILL CAN RETURN APP OVER ANYTHING LIKE:
during my eligibility OCT 2012 to OCT 2017 i have left 1 yr gap on employment history so i suspect they might return that app but i realized i reapplied another complete app on 18 OCT 2017 with cover letter explaining if they will mind that error the complete one is 18 oct with no error. So i am little bit restless until they touch 18 oct i dont know but just praying during this rough time to be in good hands.
looking to hear those who got AOR but applied under C6 but have error on gap DATES about employment or Addresses.
I agree with the vast majority of observations made in that post.
However, this part is contrary to the historical use of such documentation, and it is quite likely that IRCC continues to examine and use every item of information and documentation for multiple purposes, including especially in assessing the credibility of the presence calculation.
Particular information and documentation is typically requested for a specific purpose. That purpose, however, has never limited how it is examined and used. Almost everything in the application is at least cursorily compared to other information and documentation, with an eye to spot discrepancies, inconsistencies, and incongruities. How thorough this is done is something which probably varies a great deal, ranging from a rather cursory examination for many (those whose applications look solid) to a potentially intense scrutiny for some. Obviously, if an incongruity is spotted, the processing agent is likely to elevate the degree of scrutiny, and proportionately so as more significant anomalies or concerns are identified. For the vast majority of applicants, there is nothing in their information or documentation which invites further inquiry, and the scope of cross-checking remains relatively cursory.
We know that in past, for example, CIC had a specific practice of comparing signatures on identification with the signature and any handwriting on the application or other documentation. Indeed, all handwriting in the application package was compared. Use of this ranged from confirming identity (same person's signature in all signatures) to spotting potentially undisclosed assistance preparing the application.
If there is an address in the identification, it is virtually certain that IRCC compares that to the applicant's current address and address history.
At times the date the identification was issued was specifically examined to see if it was recent, and there was criteria employed based on how recently the ID had been issued which definitively triggered RQ (in 2012, for example, if the applicant's ID had been issued within the preceding three months, that automatically triggered a pre-test RQ). While it later became apparent that CIC at least modified its approach relative to this criteria, whether CIC merely modified it so it was no longer a definitive trigger and rather treated it as a potential "risk indicator" to be considered in context with other information, or it dropped giving weight to how recently ID had been issued altogether, is not certain, since around that same time CIC pulled the curtains shut on a lot of its internal policies and practices (up to early 2013 there were many among us regularly obtaining internal CIC memos through the ATI process, those memos becoming increasingly redacted until just about every aspect of application assessment was categorized as investigatory methods and thus confidential). My impression is that the date ID is issued continues to be examined and considered, and compared with other information, but that it is not given nearly the same attention let alone weight as it was several years ago.
Especially as to the presence requirement, it is well apparent that IRCC cross-checks ALL the information and documentation in every part of the application, looking for any indication that something is awry. Remember, while IRCC has developed many new tools and methods to verify applicant information, the core methodology continues to be rooted in cross-checking information looking for discrepancies, inconsistencies, and even mere incongruities. That was long the main fraud-detection tool employed by CIC and one of the main tools employed by CBSA as well.
But what forms of identification are required are quite certainly based on what actually proves identity, and not what other information it can provide, what other uses it might serve. What IRCC requires in an application must specifically derive from the requirements for citizenship. Moreover, the most important element is that it provide the information which will meet its purpose. So, yes, the priority for required identification is that it establish the applicant's identity. IRCC cannot go on fishing expeditions. Its requests must meet a reasonableness standard.
Of course not every wrinkle in the information is going to send IRCC into serious investigative mode. Just as we have discussed about minor mistakes, IRCC is well aware of the complexity and variability of immigrant's lives, including things like many will need to change addresses quite often and many will not keep their drivers license current. So some discrepancy between an address in a drivers license and in the address history is not likely, not in itself, to trigger a full blown presence case. Again, if deviations and incongruities are noticed, they will likely be weighed in context with all the other information in the application. But make no mistake, IRCC is looking at and comparing all parts of an application with all the other parts. Few have any reason to worry due to this. But this is part of the background underlying why I often caution prospective applicants that there is far more to consider, when deciding what is the right time to apply, then merely passing the threshold for meeting the presence requirement.
Those who have not applied yet, I would suggest send all that you can from below -
Passport - MUST
Drivers License
Health card
PR card
COPR
so that there is no doubt whatsoever for rejection atleast for the id reason.
Passport - MUST
Drivers License
Health card
PR card
COPR
so that there is no doubt whatsoever for rejection atleast for the id reason.
Last edited:
I am in the same boat as you. Sent passport - expired and current. And Drivers License as 1 piece of id. Didnt send PR, COPR. Mine was sent Oct 23.