Lawyer says the requested years of Taxes Notice Of Assessments are usually the standards to determine residency and has asked us to send her these records. She also says it shouldn't be taking so long.
MP responded to us asking us to fill out consent form for her to inquire on our behalf form as well she asked for basic ID and PRTD application information. She says she can call IRCC. Last Wednesday We've sent MP details and forms she requested.
If you and her have the assistance of a lawyer, the lawyer is a far better source of information and advice than I am.
Again, I really am NOT an expert. I cannot provide personal advice in an individual case. This is due to REAL practical reasons in addition to formalities.
And no posts here, by anyone, should be understood otherwise. This is NOT an appropriate venue for sharing enough information to support personal advice even if the person posting is an expert. (And anyone purporting to be an expert here is very likely NOT an expert.)
It appears there may indeed be some outstanding, unresolved questions of fact. The burden of proving facts sufficient to establish compliance with the PR Residency Obligation is on the PR.
All I can suggest is that the PR provide all requested information OR an honest explanation of the reason why this or that information cannot be provided. Which it appears she has done, or mostly done, or is in the process of doing.
MY FOR WHAT-IT'S-WORTH LONGER OBSERVATIONS:
If the Visa Office is accepting more information, perhaps you could help submit more supporting information and documentation. Perhaps, for example, it would help for you to submit a detailed letter from you, attested to before a notary or equivalent, detailing (as briefly as practical) precisely what facts about her presence and activities in Canada you personally know . . . dates you have lived together, including address and nature of the relationship, for example . . . and other details about joint activities from before that but still within the relevant five years.
If there are other individuals here in Canada who can write letters detailing they know her and describe what activities they PERSONALLY know she did, and some general knowledge about her, like where she was living when, those too may help. Any such letters should state ONLY what that individual personally knows and how and why (briefly explain relationship for example: "I work with . . . and . . . " or "I am a friend who has known [her name] since xx date and we have done [describe actual activities, including at least general reference to dates, such as we went to church or synagogue or the mosque such and such days of the week over xx period of time]. Letter from a dentist or accountant or even a hair dresser can really help . . . even though the letters might only refer to a few specific dates, or even rough estimates of dates (hair dresser letter saying I did her hair every other month in the summer and fall of 2017, whatever is a TRUE and as specific as possible statement of fact of a known activity she did IN Canada).
I suggest this but with repeating the CAUTION that I am NOT an expert. I do not know this will help. I do not know if the Visa Office will accept or consider such evidence.
NO NEED TO PANIC. Even if the Visa Office denies the PR TD application, she can and should appeal. Quickly as possible. And since she has been in Canada within the last year, she should then be able to get a special PR TD to come to Canada pending the appeal.
Then she will have time to more thoroughly gather evidence of her time in Canada. Including letters like I suggest above. And given the amount of time actually spent in Canada she should be able to win the appeal. The assistance of a lawyer in that process can be very helpful, but if upon being back in Canada the two of you can gather substantial evidence of her life in Canada, given as much as you said she has been in Canada, it should not be too difficult to provide concrete evidence sufficient to document her presence.
Further Observations About Letters:
(This is a broad discussion about submitting letters as supporting evidence of presence or residence generally.)
There is some reluctance to use letters from family or friends. I will discuss this more below. But such letters can be good evidence in support of a PR's case. I do not know how or if such evidence gets considered in a Visa Office processing a PR TD application. But if an appeal is necessary, letters can be added to other evidence submitted to the IAD for the appeal. And such evidence can help, or even make the difference.
Letters from professionals (like doctors or dentists or as I said even a hair dresser), such as a dentist's letter together with dates the dentist has provided services to the PR, are better than letters from family or friends. There should be no reluctance to use these kinds of letters if they are available . . . and of course that is the problem, many PRs do not have a sufficient relationship with a lawyer or doctor or dentist or such to obtain such a letter. But these can be a big help so if at all available.
Letters from employers can also be a big help. There should be no reluctance to submit letters from an employer or supervisor at the job. That said, immigrants are often hesitant to ask for such letters, for rather obvious reasons. All I can suggest is that such letters can be strong evidence, but I recognize and understand why going to the boss for help in an immigration problem might be difficult for many to do.
Letters from colleagues or co-workers are more like letters from friends EXCEPT the details to be included in the letter can be very precise and simple: dates and places and nature of relationship . . . ". . . worked with [PR] at XX [employer] from XX date to YY date, where we did XYZXYZ." That's it. OK to include some additional details, if TRUTHFUL, such as describing social activities also done together, BUT avoid burying the strong evidence of details about working together.
Letters from family or friends:
Notarized letters are better than those which are merely signed but it is NOT necessary that they be notarized. That said, my non-expert sense is that for a more comprehensive letter (like one from a partner stating a lot of details over a longer period of time) it would be significantly better if notarized.
Historically IRCC and CIC have tended to NOT give much weight to testimonial letters or even affidavits from family or friends as to matters involving residency or presence issues. And this sort of evidence is not mentioned much in the officially published decisions about actual cases in appeal. There are good reasons for this. BUT this should NOT discourage a PR from submitting TRUTHFUL testimonials from family or friends, particularly in a close case in which such evidence could make the difference.
The main reason why such letters fail to have much weight is because authorities typically doubt their credibility. Apart from the obvious interest in the matter any such witness has (by virtue of being family or friend), which is NOT enough to outright discount or disregard testimonial letters from family or friends, the biggest and, it appears to me, most common reason why such letters tend to lack credibility is that they tend to grossly overstate the case or otherwise be overly general. A letter from a friend in which the friend declares he "knows" the PR was present in Canada for more than xx years, for example, on its face appears to assert more than what a friend can personally know, and without precise such a statement simply lacks credibility. In older cases I have seen reference to such letters in which an acquaintance has stated things like "I know [PR] was present in Canada for 1132 days." On its face that shouts NOT credible.
In contrast, a letter from a friend is credible and can carry real weight if it simply states when and in what circumstances they met, how long the friend has known the PR, and which clearly separates what the friend understands versus what the friend actually knows personally, and includes precise details about particular activities on such and such dates (even if roughly described dates, like "in the summer of 2016"). Thus, for example, if a friend states something to the effect: I have known [PR] since the spring of 2016 when we lived in the same neighbourhood (stating precisely what neighbourhood that is), and I understood [PR] was living at XX address [or at least an approximate address . . . again the letter needs to be HONEST, TRUTHFUL, so if what the friend actually knows is that the PR was living just off Dundas past Lambton Park (Toronto), that is how the letter should describe what the friend knows about where the PR was living] then, in early 2016, until sometime in 2018. And during that time I often saw the PR on xx day of the week when we were both shopping at the Lambton Mini Mart. OR WHATEVER THE ACTUAL FACTS ARE AS PRECISELY AS PRACTICAL but no more precise than what the friend actually knows PERSONALLY.
A few particularly described activities at specified places in Canada, with at least fairly close estimates of the dates, consistent with what a real friend actually knows, is far better, far more credible than broad statements. And these can make a difference in a close case.
