This question is for all but for seniors especially.
I had received a QAE request and I am in process of collecting a zillion documents that they have asked for.
My question is that does this request delay your application ?
I checked few forums and blogs on the internet and it suggests that it took almost 3 years sometimes to finalize a case receiving RQs. (this was Harper era 2012-2015). Did anything change now with RQ applications ?
Also, Does you application become non-routine because of this request ? I called up IRCC & they told me that there is no such thing as "non-routine" now- they have stopped doing that ?
is that true ?
I was thinking of going to school in the US for 2 years but this request has slowed down my process and plans.
Also see discussion in the topic titled "RQ versus Physical Presence Questionnaires, including CIT 0205"
The cover letter most receive, and I assume you have as well, states:
"
Being selected for this exercise should not delay the processing of your application as long as you provide the documents as requested."
Whether that will be the usual case remains to be seen. At the least, though, there is reason to hope that IRCC will make a concerted effort to avoid delays for applicants hit by the PPQ-QAE.
There are some similarities between this PPQ-QAE and the notorious surge in RQ (2010 to early 2012), and the draconian pre-test RQ policy attendant OB-407 in 2012, the latter of which nearly brought all citizenship application processing to a standstill and resulted in scores of qualified applicants suffering delays for two and three years.
But there are also some significant differences. The label is one, this being called a Quality Assurance Exercise and which is purportedly
RANDOM. While there is reason to doubt it is entirely random, it appears that IRCC is making an effort to process this relatively in-stride, so to say, as if those selected can anticipate having their application processed more or less in queue.
Routine vs Non-routine:
During the Harper government years CIC was reporting timelines based on whether the application was routine or "non-routine," with "non-routine" meaning anything outside the specific standard steps and actions. Thus, for example, any request for additional information, including Finger Prints, rendered the application "non-routine." BUT it was not as if the label meant anything in particular beyond that, beyond the mere fact there was some additional action, some of which had little impact on the overall timeline while others, like a full-blown RQ, could have a big impact on the timeline.
I often use "non-routine" in a more generic sense, meaning about the same thing, as in something outside or in addition to the usual steps and actions. I typically limit references to non-routine cases to things which do tend to actually involve significant other actions which are likely to affect the timeline. The fact that IRCC is no longer identifying applications as "non-routine" means little or nothing. Applications diverted from the mainstream processing track are, in practice, in effect, diverted from the routine processing track . . . hence, non-routine. And likely to take longer.
How much longer is currently a wide, wide open question.
I have some guesses. Some working-speculation. But there is not enough reliable information yet to practically discuss those guesses.
While the parameters of what happened in the 2010 through mid-2013 period are relatively well-known now,
in retrospect, back then it took a long time for forum participants to learn much detail about the escalated rate of RQ generally (2010 to early 2012), and then it took many months for us to figure out what was happening after OB 407 implemented a draconian pre-test RQ regimen in April 2012 (OB 407 was NOT publicly published; it took from April when it first took effect into mid-summer for us to even learn about OB-407 let alone get much of a handle at all on what was happening, and then it took months more to learn some of the details . . . and it was not until well into 2013 that the impact could be assessed, and even then we were still guessing a lot).
Summary: we do not really know how this is going to go.
Confession: I was among those who underestimated the impact of OB-407 . . . and I did so by quite a lot. At least six months or so for those who were on the better end of the pre-test RQ process. So I am not making any bets on this one. I lean toward thinking it will not be anywhere near as bad as it was 2010 to 2013 (by 2014 most of the long delayed cases were resolved, but a sizable number did continue to take longer and longer) but we just do not know . . . and as bureaucracies are wont to do, subsets of clients can too often, too easily, suffer from lack of attention.
QAE is a very new procedure, which I believe was introduced after C6 was implemented. I don't think anyone knows what kind of impact this has on an applicant's file, just yet.
Just for clarification: The surge in issuing the PPQ-QAE CIT 0205 with additional requests does appear to be recent, since the implementation of Bill C-6 changes to the presence requirements (October 11), BUT there is an earlier version of the PPQ-QAE . . . CIT 0205 (05-2017) . . . compared to a more recent version CIT 0205 (11-2017). And a few of the participants affected referenced above are pre-October 11 applicants and at least one reported getting this (the CIT 0205 (05-2017) version) late summer, well before the October changes.
But dead on about no one knowing what impact this will have yet. Which is a good reason why those going through this can help others by reporting their experience, as much as they are comfortable sharing.
(Edit to correct typo in one reference to CIT 0205)
