October 11th 2017 - Citizenship Applicants under 3/5 rule

[hime]

Just received my AOR: Nov 23th

Just received my AOR: Nov 23th

@KhireKhar, I have added you to the spreadsheet. Please keep us posted with your application progress.

Thanks,

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/16cfQUVB3j56QktacolbsAxpNlOrvk2uFGZzm_ZFCnfg/

 

[jeff.torbain]

I have not received AOR.
I had my application delivered on Oct. 13th to IRCC

 

[uncomfortable]

I am NO expert. I cannot offer personal advice.

Some recommendations are obvious and easy: be sure to have a good margin over the minimum for example.

Some applicants would be prudent to have a bigger margin than other applicants. For an applicant relying on credit for pre-PR time, for example, probably a good idea to have a bigger margin.

For an applicant without a consistent history of reporting to a job site or attending classes, probably a good idea to have a bigger margin.

But when to apply is a very personal decision. The strength of your records to show presence and address should be taken into consideration. The extent to which your family ties are well-established in Canada, or not, is a significant factor to consider.

Just remember that a total stranger bureaucrat will look at what you submit, and that is who needs to be persuaded you met the requirements.

Now, this may be slightly OT, but I still don't get the concept of "buffer". The physical presence is a very "black or white" concept. On any given day, either you are present or you are not. If you have done your homework i.e. kept track of all the trips and made sure that the info available to you (that is the entry stamps into Canada from CBSA and, possibly, the entry and exit records from the US I94, if that is applicable to you) tally up with the trips you have entered in the calculator, I can't see why there should be a problem.
Because if the IRCC officer thinks you are misreporting something, you may be misreporting it whether you have 1100 or 1500 days.
I just don't get it.

 

[kaafmeem]

I got my AOR today. Could someone please update the excel sheet? Thanks!

 

[dpenabill]

Now, this may be slightly OT, but I still don't get the concept of "buffer". The physical presence is a very "black or white" concept. On any given day, either you are present or you are not. If you have done your homework i.e. kept track of all the trips and made sure that the info available to you (that is the entry stamps into Canada from CBSA and, possibly, the entry and exit records from the US I94, if that is applicable to you) tally up with the trips you have entered in the calculator, I can't see why there should be a problem.
Because if the IRCC officer thinks you are misreporting something, you may be misreporting it whether you have 1100 or 1500 days.
I just don't get it.

The reason for IRCC's recommendation of a buffer (the recommendation to wait to apply beyond meeting the minimum requirement), which is similar to why the consensus here is to have a week or so buffer, is to allow for the possibility of a mistake, recognizing that many, many applicants make mistakes (it is worth noting that more than a few forum participants who were totally certain they accurately accounted all dates of travel subsequently recognized making some mistake; also note, those who are absolutely certain they have made no mistakes are quite likely mistaken).

In addition to that, however, my view is also premised on the recognition that it is not just about whether the applicant has made a mistake, but also about the extent to which the total stranger bureaucrat assessing the applicant's physical presence can be confident there is NO possibility of a mistake affecting eligibility.

To a significant extent you are correct. Applicants declaring presence in Canada 200 or even 300 days above the minimum have not only been RQ'd but overtly challenged as to their presence in Canada, and some denied citizenship on the basis they failed to PROVE sufficient presence in Canada to meet the requirements (there are more of these cases going back to when there was a RESIDENCY requirement rather than a PHYSICAL PRESENCE requirement).

However, no overt suspicion is necessary to trigger elevated scrutiny, non-routine processing (including RQ), and potentially lengthy delays in processing time. In particular, it is NOT necessary for the processing agent to think the applicant is "misreporting something" for the application and applicant to be subject to additional, more thorough screening, and thus some delay in getting to the oath.

A buffer reduces risks. It does not totally eliminate risks. A buffer reduces the risk that a mistake will undermine eligibility, so long as the buffer is larger than all mistakes. It also reduces the risk that IRCC will need to engage in non-routine processing to make sure there are no mistakes or omissions which could POSSIBLY undermine eligibility.

How much of a buffer is a good idea varies widely from one applicant to another. Deciding when is the right time to apply is a very personal decision, one dependent on many, many individual factors. Just reaching the minimum threshold is merely one factor, a necessary condition of course, but there are many other things to consider if one wants to minimize the risk of non-routine processing.

Otherwise, no, physical presence is NOT black & white. While that requires an even longer explanation, and would indeed be too far off topic for this thread, it is perhaps worth revisiting some of the basics about the extent to which the routine application depends on an inference of presence rather than direct proof of presence.

Sure, it is true that on any given day a person either is in Canada, or not in Canada. BUT for purposes of meeting the actual physical presence requirement for grant citizenship, the number of days actually in Canada is not at all black and white. After all, who can affirmatively document, let alone conclusively prove, where they physically were each and every day?

For the majority of days calculated to have been physically present in Canada, for almost all applicants, presence is generally INFERRED. I have discussed this inference extensively in other conversations, including in particular the inference which is built into the presence calculator itself: the INFERENCE of presence in-between a reported date of entry into Canada and the next reported date of exit. Most applicants benefit from this inference. If, however, there is any possibility (even per innocent mistake) the applicant was not present some of those days in-between a date of entry and next exit, that inference may not hold.

Note, there are scores of actual cases in officially published decisions in which it is emphasized that entry and exit dates do NOT prove presence in-between those dates. This does not arise in the routine case. In the routine case the presence calculator and IRCC do indeed consider the applicant present in-between entry and next exit dates. If there is any concern, however, the dynamics change.

Overall, the amount of buffer which a prospective applicant can anticipate will obviate or at least reduce potential concerns, the amount of buffer which will in effect encourage the total stranger bureaucrat to be comfortable relying on the standard inference (of presence between entry and next exit dates), varies widely. The person regularly and full time employed as a welder in a Bombardier plant (located within a reasonable commute from his residence) for the past three plus years, can probably feel safe and comfortable with a much smaller margin than the applicant who has a sporadic employment history. The Bombardier employee is safe covering possible, small mistakes in dates. The applicant with gaps in employment may want to have a buffer which covers enough time to make the processing agent more confident about relying on the overall calculation meeting the minimum.

 

[jeff.torbain]

Got my AOR.
Finally... Please update sheet

 

[jeff.torbain]

Hi folks,
Do you know if I could ask for an urgent processing now that I've received AOR?
I travel on a passport that is considered "banned" by U.S. and I wanna apply for a position that requires travel South.

 

[uncomfortable]

The reason for IRCC's recommendation of a buffer (the recommendation to wait to apply beyond meeting the minimum requirement),
...
The Bombardier employee is safe covering possible, small mistakes in dates. The applicant with gaps in employment may want to have a buffer which covers enough time to make the processing agent more confident about relying on the overall calculation meeting the minimum.

Thank you for the usual long-winded and detailed explanation. I understand the argument, although I still cannot see how a person can
"not be present in Canada" if they had entered and they had not exited. It would mean having crossed a border illegally, which would constitute a fairly serious infraction.

 

[Whocares]

Thank you for the usual long-winded and detailed explanation. I understand the argument, although I still cannot see how a person can
"not be present in Canada" if they had entered and they had not exited. It would mean having crossed a border illegally, which would constitute a fairly serious infraction.

If you think logically, you will be lost. Few words, it depends on the officer's mood. Can you imagine that even passport stamps/entry and exit report are not sufficiently enough to prove that you haven't left Canada!! Logically it makes no sense but for the officer WHO CARES, just wants to turn your life into hell.

My opinion, the amount of buffer depends on number of travels. If someone is a frequent traveller, the buffer should be more than if you haven't left Canada at all. I would say 1 or 2 days buffer if you haven't left Canada, in case you landed early morning?!

 

[dpenabill]

although I still cannot see how a person can
"not be present in Canada" if they had entered and they had not exited. It would mean having crossed a border illegally, which would constitute a fairly serious infraction.

I'll give it another shot:

As for logic: if a person entered and did not exit, in-between those events they could NOT have crossed a border illegally or otherwise. They did not cross the border at all.

But the question remains: did they cross the border? Legally or otherwise. That's the issue. To what extent can IRCC rely on REPORTED dates of entry and exit to be all the actual dates of entry and exit?

IRCC does not have a crystal ball. There is no omniscient source to absolutely verify ALL actual dates of entry and exit.

In any decision-making process, including IRCC's verification of an applicant's physical presence, the decision-maker must evaluate the available information. For citizenship applications, and the presence requirement, the question is: does IRCC need any additional information or evidence to verify the applicant's reported travel dates?

Again, IRCC primarily relies on REPORTED dates of entry and exit. For the vast majority of applicants, IRCC relies on the applicant's reported dates of entry and exit EVEN IF the applicant POSSIBLY made an error or omission in reporting the dates.

That's the way most applicant's want things to go. Most applicants do not want IRCC to take longer digging through additional information, let alone impose something like the profoundly inconvenient and intrusive RQ process. They want IRCC to rely on what they reported in their presence calculation . . . EVEN IF they made a mistake (and many, many applicants do make mistakes, some some surprisingly large).

Thus, beyond covering the possibility of an error in reporting (having at least some buffer), the idea of more buffer is to give IRCC enough of a margin to comfortably rely on the applicant's reporting without the need for non-routine processing, without requesting and examining additional information.

For the applicant whose history, whose circumstances, are such as to more thoroughly document minimal prospects of an error or omission (the full time and regular employee of Bombardier, say), a smaller buffer or margin is plenty. For the applicant whose history has more POSSIBILITIES for omissions (applicant with significant gaps between periods of employment, or an applicant whose employment is vague, like a "consultant" with no precise or continuous location the work is done), a larger buffer can help obviate or at least reduce any IRCC concerns about POSSIBLE omissions.

That's why a buffer is recommended. So that IRCC can more readily conclude the applicant met the requirements without conducting additional inquiries or investigations, without imposing non-routine processing.

A buffer is not a necessary requirement. If IRCC concludes the applicant has adequately shown he or she was present for 1095 days (within the relevant time period), 1095 days is enough. There are plenty of reports from applicants who succeeded in obtaining citizenship even though they applied with no more than a day or two above, or even right at the minimum, both under the old 3/4 rules and under the previous 4/6 rules. But overall, generally applicants who apply with a reasonable buffer relative to their own particular circumstances tend to take the oath sooner, with fewer bumps along the way.

Most applicants prefer to go the way that works the best. A reasonable buffer tends to be one of those ways.

And over the years, many years now, this PRACTICAL approach appears to have had a positive impact for scores and scores of applicants. In contrast, the forums are littered with the wailing of those who cut-it-close and came here to bitterly complain about CIC and IRCC injustice.

 

[Hewlett-Packard]

Hi guys.. i receive my AOR on the Nov 21, by entering my UCI number... but i never received any email notification. I have checked my spam and nothing is there. I'm just wondering if anyone has the same issue..
Thx for any feedback
Ps.. check often your by entering

 

[Hewlett-Packard]

Ps: Check often by entering your UCI OR PR NUMBER ON CHECK APP. STATUS ON CIC WEBSITE

 

[rdcanada]

Hi,
My application is in process since Nov 23.

IP: Nov 23
Line: 135

 

[guddylover]

I'll give it another shot:

As for logic: if a person entered and did not exit, in-between those events they could NOT have crossed a border illegally or otherwise. They did not cross the border at all.

But the question remains: did they cross the border? Legally or otherwise. That's the issue. To what extent can IRCC rely on REPORTED dates of entry and exit to be all the actual dates of entry and exit?

IRCC does not have a crystal ball. There is no omniscient source to absolutely verify ALL actual dates of entry and exit.

In any decision-making process, including IRCC's verification of an applicant's physical presence, the decision-maker must evaluate the available information. For citizenship applications, and the presence requirement, the question is: does IRCC need any additional information or evidence to verify the applicant's reported travel dates?

Again, IRCC primarily relies on REPORTED dates of entry and exit. For the vast majority of applicants, IRCC relies on the applicant's reported dates of entry and exit EVEN IF the applicant POSSIBLY made an error or omission in reporting the dates.

That's the way most applicant's want things to go. Most applicants do not want IRCC to take longer digging through additional information, let alone impose something like the profoundly inconvenient and intrusive RQ process. They want IRCC to rely on what they reported in their presence calculation . . . EVEN IF they made a mistake (and many, many applicants do make mistakes, some some surprisingly large).

Thus, beyond covering the possibility of an error in reporting (having at least some buffer), the idea of more buffer is to give IRCC enough of a margin to comfortably rely on the applicant's reporting without the need for non-routine processing, without requesting and examining additional information.

For the applicant whose history, whose circumstances, are such as to more thoroughly document minimal prospects of an error or omission (the full time and regular employee of Bombardier, say), a smaller buffer or margin is plenty. For the applicant whose history has more POSSIBILITIES for omissions (applicant with significant gaps between periods of employment, or an applicant whose employment is vague, like a "consultant" with no precise or continuous location the work is done), a larger buffer can help obviate or at least reduce any IRCC concerns about POSSIBLE omissions.

That's why a buffer is recommended. So that IRCC can more readily conclude the applicant met the requirements without conducting additional inquiries or investigations, without imposing non-routine processing.

A buffer is not a necessary requirement. If IRCC concludes the applicant has adequately shown he or she was present for 1095 days (within the relevant time period), 1095 days is enough. There are plenty of reports from applicants who succeeded in obtaining citizenship even though they applied with no more than a day or two above, or even right at the minimum, both under the old 3/4 rules and under the previous 4/6 rules. But overall, generally applicants who apply with a reasonable buffer relative to their own particular circumstances tend to take the oath sooner, with fewer bumps along the way.

Most applicants prefer to go the way that works the best. A reasonable buffer tends to be one of those ways.

And over the years, many years now, this PRACTICAL approach appears to have had a positive impact for scores and scores of applicants. In contrast, the forums are littered with the wailing of those who cut-it-close and came here to bitterly complain about CIC and IRCC injustice.

I don't really know how to come into this. So IRCC cannot really rely on the entry and exit report on their physical residence calculator, then why did we sign the consent for them to check CBSA, now people might say Canada only record or stamp entries and not exit, but whose fault is that. Just the other day someone was suggesting that even if cbsa report comes back clean that IRCC might still think the person may have exited Canada illegally. I am just sick and tired of trying to think about what would hurt IRCC feelings or not. They seem like a mini god.

 

[Come-by-chance]

Hi,
Today I have received my AOR!
Can you please update the Spreadsheet.
App delivered on 17-10-2017.
App Received on 20-10-2017.
AOR Received on 24-11-2017