I have the same issue, one of the stamp is wrong. Just wondering how long did it take for the whole process for them to clarify? Did the officer eventually send you an email?
An erroneous stamp entry in a passport is NOT itself an "issue." So it is NOT likely you have the "same issue."
How things go from here depend on the particulars in your individual situation, the details in your specific case.
If your situation is similar to that described by
@Samlia, much of what I posted more than a year and a half ago, above, applies. That is, as I stated above, all you can do now is watch for communication or notice from IRCC and respond accordingly. . . . It could be days, weeks, months, many months.
And again, how it goes for you, in particular, will DEPEND on the facts in your particular case.
@Samlia was issued a CIT 0520 (see
post linked here), which is often referred to as RQ-lite. Obviously IRCC had some questions beyond the inaccuracy of a passport stamp, but apparently not particularly serious questions. For
@Samlia the CIT 0520 only requested limited records to verify travel dates, and apparently there was no request for other RQ-related evidence. Since even that request constituted RQ-related non-routine processing, it was another six months before there was a Decision-Made to grant citizenship, and around seven months to the oath ceremony itself. It is worth noting that even though many applicants are scheduled for the oath significantly sooner after the test event, many others have had to wait a similar amount of time for the oath even though their application was ROUTINELY processed. So the delay for
@Samlia was not especially lengthy, particularly given that it was a non-routine application subject to some RQ-related requests.
Thus, assuming that during your test event PI Interview there was some concern expressed about your travel history, triggered by a discrepancy between a passport stamp and other information, even though it is NOT likely your "issue" is the "same issue," as I observed back in the summer of 2018 for
@Samlia :
all you can do now is watch for communication or notice from IRCC and respond accordingly. Nothing to gain by worrying. It could be days, weeks, months, many months.
Note that
@Samlia received the CIT 0520 less than two weeks after the test event interview. But, since the nature of what is at issue in your case is likely at least somewhat different, what happens next FOR YOU could range from being scheduled to take the oath to similarly receiving some version of RQ-related requests, and any of these things could happen in days, week, months, or not for many months. Again, all you can do now is wait and watch for communication or notice from IRCC and respond accordingly.
While we may be able to describe a more particular range for what is likely if you offered more detail about the particulars in your case, it would still be very difficult if not impossible to forecast what will actually happen, and even more difficult to forecast when or how long it will take.
SOME FURTHER OBSERVATIONS REGARDING ERRONEOUS PASSPORT STAMPS:
What impact an erroneous stamp entry in a passport has, IF ANY, can vary greatly. Little or NO impact is the most likely effect if the error is in a date stamp for entry into Canada since the applicant's CBSA travel history will almost certainly have the correct date of entry. (CBSA travel history may have omissions, though this is increasingly unusual, but the data it shows is almost always accurate.)
Of course, this assumes the applicant's presence calculation travel history IS ACCURATE. Thus, for example, even though there is an entry stamp into Canada for a date that is NOT the correct date of entry, the CBSA travel history will confirm the applicant's ACCURATELY declared date of entry.
In contrast, if the applicant reported a date of entry, in the presence calculation, based on the erroneous passport stamp, the applicant thus reported an inaccurate date. If that is the only mistake this would NOT ordinarily cause much if any concern, but since it constitutes an erroneous reporting of facts it can contribute to an impression the applicant cannot be relied upon to be an accurate reporter of the facts -- obviously, since the applicant was there at the time of entry, the applicant knows the accurate date and of course it is the applicant's responsibility to report the accurate date regardless what any other source or document might indicate. That is, if the entry stamp is inaccurate AND the applicant's presence calculation also reports that as the date of entry, the problem is NOT that the entry stamp is in error. The problem is the applicant's declaration as to the date of entry is in error.
Even if the situation first becomes apparent to the interviewer during the test event PI Interview, when the interviewer is reviewing the applicant's passport stamps, that is very easily resolved and it should take only MINUTES for either the interviewer or the responsible Citizenship Officer to access the applicant's CBSA travel history and confirm the correct date of entry as reported by the applicant in the presence calculation. Even though this may not be done soon after the interview, it should not take long and should have rather little impact, if any, on the timeline.
There are various contextual situations in which the erroneous entry stamp can raise questions or trigger concern. These can range from minimal concern to more extensive and serious concerns. For
@Samlia, for example, it appears the circumstances raised enough concern for IRCC to issue the RQ-lite, but not so much concern as to trigger a more intrusive or extensive request for additional evidence related to proof of actual presence in Canada.
Remember, it is the applicant's responsibility to ACCURATELY report actual dates of exit and entry. Since the applicant was personally there each and every time the applicant left and returned to Canada, the applicant not only has total access to this information, the applicant is the ONE BEST source for this information. If the applicant kept accurate records, and populated the presence calculation travel history accordingly, NO PROBLEM.
As it is often cautioned in this forum, applicants should NEVER rely entirely on any individual item of evidence (like a passport stamp) or other sources of information (including CBSA or U.S. or another country's records of entry or exit), any of which can be inaccurate. Again, the applicant's own records are the ONE BEST SOURCE. If the applicant failed to keep complete and accurate records, it is incumbent on the applicant to do due diligence in verifying, as best as possible, the accurate dates of travel . . . regarding, which, again, applicants should NEVER rely entirely on a single source.
In any event . . . a passport stamp is merely a single item of evidence. Actual facts matter more. And accurate reporting of the actual facts matters more.
Thus, what that "issue" actually is can vary widely. It can range from something of minimal import (virtually not important at all) to something which raises significant questions about the applicant's presence calculation or even the applicant's credibility.
The details matter.
