I have just mailed out my documents and I have found out that I made some minor mistakes on the returning day and I have missed calculating 4 visits to the US but those was same day return back to Canada. In the end, I still got enough buffer to be eligible.
Thanks, after I checked US entry history, I actually missed like 15 days same day return trip. Do you think I should request another physical presence calculator through the web form? But my total physical presence is still like 24 days more that 1095. Thanks,
Difference between 4 omissions and more than a DOZEN is significant. But forecasting the actual impact is nonetheless close to impossible, except that yes, as others have indicated, there is some risk these omissions could trigger non-routine processing.
How it goes will most likely depend on whether there are any other factors or circumstances in your case which contribute to concerns about the accuracy of your information, or otherwise raise doubts about you meeting the minimum physical presence requirement, or otherwise indicate reason to doubt your credibility. That is, the strength of your case, apart from these particular omissions, will likely determine the nature and extent of any non-routine processing you encounter.
Contrary to overly extrapolating from isolated facts (a failing prone to many observations in this venue), generally ONE or TWO omissions which do not affect the calculation will NOT trigger even the more moderate RQ related requests, let alone a full-blown RQ (even during the draconian RQ overreach in 2012, two one day errors did NOT TRIGGER the triage criteria). Applicants with omissions of absences for three weeks or so have sailed smoothly through the process, answering questions acknowledging the error during the interview, NO RQ, no non-routine processing, oath promptly scheduled. But the latter cases involve applicants with strong cases, good margins over the minimum (way more than enough to accommodate the omissions), and were obviously considered very credible by IRCC.
In contrast, if the interviewer apprehends reason to doubt the applicant's credibility, or otherwise sees reasons to question the case, even one omission can contribute to a decision to impose the full-blown RQ process.
But of course more than a DOZEN omissions . . . ouch. One thing if you made some note in the application acknowledging numerous day trips not all of which were reported in the calculation (there used to be a FAQ about "estimating" dates). Another thing to have signed the calculation verifying that it was complete and accurate without acknowledging some estimations or possible day trip omissions.
But the good news is that multiple day trips tend to be confirmed by CBSA entry records AND can actually corroborate a life being lived in Canada. So the pattern of day trips itself can actually help to make a stronger case.
This number of omissions might be noticed early in the process (if IRCC is cross-checking CBSA travel history early in the process . . . we do not know if they are), in which event it is possible that non-routine RQ related processing could happen before the interview.
More likely there will be no impact on processing your application UNTIL the interview. What will happen, then, AGAIN THAT IS NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE TO FORECAST.
-- Possibly RQ. Yes, possibly. Could be a version of RQ-lite or the full blown CIT 0171 RQ, or something in between.
-- Perhaps only a request, during the interview, that you consent (give authorization) to IRCC to access your U.S. travel history directly (U.S. and Canada have border crossing record-sharing arrangements, so that Canada can get direct access to U.S. entry records for anyone other than a U.S. citizen, and even for U.S. citizens it appears this will be available sometime soon).
-- Perhaps this will only trigger some questions during the interview and be NO big deal at all (assuming your responses assure the interviewer these were simply oversights).
-- These omissions ALONE should NOT trigger any negative decision-making.
As for possible negative decision-making. Again, since these omissions do NOT change the presence calculation, they ALONE should NOT trigger any negative decision . . . BUT of course they could trigger elevated scrutiny and some doubt about your credibility . . . obviously you have shown yourself to NOT be an entirely reliable reporter of facts since you failed to be an accurate reporter of the facts . . . at least as to more than a dozen occasions. But again, ALONE these are NO big deal. BUT if there are other reasons to doubt your case, they can have some negative influence.
Once you have received AOR and have a case number, you can send IRCC a supplemental submission acknowledging that your presence calculation failed to include a number of day trips, and explain why (simply stated, maybe no more than "I overlooked" . . . ), and affirm that the total calculation itself is not changed. And yes I think you can use the webform process to do this, but others currently engaged in processing can address the mechanics better.
OR you can simply wait to the interview and be prepared to fully acknowledge you overlooked and omitted some day trips.
REGARDING U.S. TRAVEL HISTORY:
You can check your US entry-exits here
https://i94.cbp.dhs.gov/I94/#/home
I found out there was one strip to US that didn’t show in this website. I assume this is not 100% accurate as well?
For day trips to the U.S. you really do NOT need to get records from the U.S. (which would show dates of ENTRY into the U.S., which ordinarily will not show road border crossing U.S. exits). All your entry dates back into Canada should be available in your CBSA travel history, based on entry dates into Canada. (Of course, if the trip was not actually a same day trip, that will not show the exit date from Canada.)
Both the U.S. and Canadian records may have some OMISSIONS.
Some inaccuracies are possible but NOT common. That is, the dates and such are almost always ACCURATE . . . but they might not be COMPLETE. (More and more they are, with isolated exceptions . . . but they are NOT necessarily complete, so they are NOT relied on to be complete.)
OVERALL:
Day trips do NOT deduct any days from the presence calculation. So substantively this has NO direct impact on your qualifications.
Whether these omissions affect how it goes, either in terms of potential non-routine processing, or in terms of ultimate decisions made, will be more about your OVERALL case. Main thing is whether or not IRCC is satisfied with the information you have provided. That will likely depend on many other aspects of your application. Contrary to what many in this forum suggest, a 24 day margin over the minimum is NOT much of a margin. Sure, that is plenty for many. Not so much so for many others.
But the bottom-line is how confident can the IRCC decision-makers be that you definitely met the 1095 days of actual presence requirement? These omissions can have an impact on how they assess your case, but other aspects of your case will have a big impact on that assessment.
How it has gone for this or that other person ONLY illuminates a range of what MIGHT happen . . . not what will happen. What will happen will depend on YOUR facts, the strength of YOUR case, YOUR credibility as seen in the eyes of the total stranger bureaucrats who make the decision in your case.
