PR cards expire one year ago. How to return to Canada?
- Thread starter Vadym1977
- Start date
Asylum has never been asked for anywhere. There are programs for the repatriation of different countries. This is possible if a great-grandfather or great-grandmother was born on certain territories.
Really I don't understand why some people in this forum start to give their decision instead giving their advice. Every person has his own situation and circumstances and some persons stick their nose to make the situation even worse without any reason
Well, the advice you get here is worth precisely what you pay for it.
In addition, it is an open forum, you know. You can't force people to respond, or not, or respond only how you'd like. People ask questions, other people give answers. It's up to you to take what you can from those answers.
No point getting irritated because someone said something you didn't like. In general, you get decent advice here for simple cases. For more complex cases of course you shouldn't be asking on random internet forums!
If someone really pisses you off, just ignore them. You can click on their name and choose "ignore" from the menu that pops up. You could ignore me if you like
Given that Canada has such a lenient residency policy for PR most Canadians get upset when people can’t follow the RO and are trying to sneak in or use friends to get a job offer so they can get a work permit.
Especially when many people here are sponsoring spouses who cannot get a visa to Canada, and are waiting months and years for any movement on the file - when it becomes apparent that others get PR and then discard it, it's disheartening and frustrating.
My hypocrisy looms. My disdain ignites far more for those who judge others, especially based on scant information, than it does for fellow Canadians struggling to establish a life in Canada.
So sure, I lean toward negatively judging those who judge others. I am human. I am flawed. My hypocrisy follows me like a shadow.
Unlike many countries, Canadian law considers Permanent Residents to be CANADIANS. And once a PR, always a PR unless and until that is formally terminated by adjudication, renouncement, or becoming a citizen. Once a PR, always a CANADIAN unless and until . . .
Canada embraces its immigrants. Some may not have noticed, but immigrants tend to come in just about every stripe and pattern of human being there is, warts and all. They come with a lot more baggage than the household goods declared on customs' forms. The transition for many is not all that easy and far from linear.
Immigrants are NOT created equal. Just who gets to come to Canada depends in very large part on all sorts of advantages. A very high percentage of immigrants are NOT at all so-called merit qualified but, rather, are family class or accompanying family. But even among those who are issued merit-based PR, their path to immigrating to Canada often began with a package of advantages given them compared to literally BILLIONS of others in the world.
Sure, there are scores gaming the system. More than an occasional outright cheat. They generally will not find sympathetic keyboards here, for good reason.
But for PRs the rules are indeed rather lenient. PRs have a statutory right (a "privilege" the law categorizes it) to enter Canada. It is entirely consistent with the rules for a PR who has not complied with the PR Residency Obligation to approach Canada at a land border and apply for entry (just showing up at the PIL is considered an "application for entry") . . . and as long as they do not make misrepresentations, as long as they honestly respond to the questions asked, it is up to the border officers whether or not the PR deserves to be Reported or deserves a chance to enter and settle in Canada.
Most indications suggest that generally border officials tend to be lenient if not outright generous . . . but it seems this can depend a lot on what kind of impression the PR makes. My sense is that, in addition to the heavy weight of credibility, many border officials will be more lenient toward a PR if they perceive the PR is making a genuine effort to come and settle in Canada EVEN IF the PR has failed to technically comply with the RO. This MAKES SENSE. This is consistent with the purpose of PR status and the general scheme which is focused more on that purpose (facilitating the immigrant's permanent settlement in Canada) than on technical rules.
Thus, in PoE 44(1) Report cases appealed to the IAD, it is common to see a PR who was allowed entry into Canada, without being reported, AFTER being in breach, sometimes multiple times, and then finally, the third or fourth time, it being blatantly obvious by then, then Reported. That is, the IAD decisions themselves reveal that PoE officials often give PRs second and third chances.
We see it here, in the forum. Queries from PRs who have been allowed to return to Canada without being Reported despite being in breach of the RO, asking questions about when they can apply for a new PR card or to sponsor a child. Scores of forum posts are by PRs who were in breach, came and stayed long enough to cure the breach, but then run into Secondary Review when they apply for a new PR card.
Some have been gaming the system. They get what they get. Many, many others, however, are simply one more immigrant among the many, many thousands of us, whose path to settling in Canada has not been nearly so smooth or easy as some of us have had it.
Regardless, though, they all deserve to be informed about the rules and how the rules work. Without having aspersions cast on them. (With some exceptions, of course . . . we do get the occasional query which, in effect, asks "what lies can I tell to get away with breaking the rules?" Which mostly should be ignored but . . . )
As for using a friend to get a job offer to get a work permit:
I suppose some here have NEVER taken advantage of networking. But for every immigrant who has never taken advantage of networking, there are hundreds if not thousands of others who have . . . and for a rather significant number of them, that advantage played a role in their path to becoming a Canadian . . . from help getting the educational or work experience background that played a role in qualifying to immigrate . . . to the most prevalent familial networking: being an accompanying family member or a sponsored family class PR.
It seems, though, some are happy to take advantage of the opportunities their networking offers and condemn those who would take advantage of some other kind of networking opportunities. I am NOT the only hypocrite around.
I for sure would not be here, in Canada, which is where I really want to be, but for a good friend who later became my partner and who sponsored me. I have a life now I could not have imagined two or three decades ago. The depth of my gratitude cannot be adequately expressed in words, or perhaps even in deeds.
As noted, who gets to come to Canada depends a great deal on all sorts of advantages some have and BILLIONS of others do not. Not a level playing field. Those who have a problem with this can petition the UN, for what that is worth. Or their God, for what that is worth. Otherwise, I suspect that those who complain loudest about the advantages someone else has had, have themselves enjoyed more than their share of advantages. If possible, I'd offer a tissue and some sympathy. In the meantime, though, the best I can do is share what we can about what the rules are and how they work. At least that part of the equation should balance, everyone getting an opportunity to know the rules and how they work.
So sure, I lean toward negatively judging those who judge others. I am human. I am flawed. My hypocrisy follows me like a shadow.
Unlike many countries, Canadian law considers Permanent Residents to be CANADIANS. And once a PR, always a PR unless and until that is formally terminated by adjudication, renouncement, or becoming a citizen. Once a PR, always a CANADIAN unless and until . . .
Canada embraces its immigrants. Some may not have noticed, but immigrants tend to come in just about every stripe and pattern of human being there is, warts and all. They come with a lot more baggage than the household goods declared on customs' forms. The transition for many is not all that easy and far from linear.
Immigrants are NOT created equal. Just who gets to come to Canada depends in very large part on all sorts of advantages. A very high percentage of immigrants are NOT at all so-called merit qualified but, rather, are family class or accompanying family. But even among those who are issued merit-based PR, their path to immigrating to Canada often began with a package of advantages given them compared to literally BILLIONS of others in the world.
Sure, there are scores gaming the system. More than an occasional outright cheat. They generally will not find sympathetic keyboards here, for good reason.
But for PRs the rules are indeed rather lenient. PRs have a statutory right (a "privilege" the law categorizes it) to enter Canada. It is entirely consistent with the rules for a PR who has not complied with the PR Residency Obligation to approach Canada at a land border and apply for entry (just showing up at the PIL is considered an "application for entry") . . . and as long as they do not make misrepresentations, as long as they honestly respond to the questions asked, it is up to the border officers whether or not the PR deserves to be Reported or deserves a chance to enter and settle in Canada.
Most indications suggest that generally border officials tend to be lenient if not outright generous . . . but it seems this can depend a lot on what kind of impression the PR makes. My sense is that, in addition to the heavy weight of credibility, many border officials will be more lenient toward a PR if they perceive the PR is making a genuine effort to come and settle in Canada EVEN IF the PR has failed to technically comply with the RO. This MAKES SENSE. This is consistent with the purpose of PR status and the general scheme which is focused more on that purpose (facilitating the immigrant's permanent settlement in Canada) than on technical rules.
Thus, in PoE 44(1) Report cases appealed to the IAD, it is common to see a PR who was allowed entry into Canada, without being reported, AFTER being in breach, sometimes multiple times, and then finally, the third or fourth time, it being blatantly obvious by then, then Reported. That is, the IAD decisions themselves reveal that PoE officials often give PRs second and third chances.
We see it here, in the forum. Queries from PRs who have been allowed to return to Canada without being Reported despite being in breach of the RO, asking questions about when they can apply for a new PR card or to sponsor a child. Scores of forum posts are by PRs who were in breach, came and stayed long enough to cure the breach, but then run into Secondary Review when they apply for a new PR card.
Some have been gaming the system. They get what they get. Many, many others, however, are simply one more immigrant among the many, many thousands of us, whose path to settling in Canada has not been nearly so smooth or easy as some of us have had it.
Regardless, though, they all deserve to be informed about the rules and how the rules work. Without having aspersions cast on them. (With some exceptions, of course . . . we do get the occasional query which, in effect, asks "what lies can I tell to get away with breaking the rules?" Which mostly should be ignored but . . . )
As for using a friend to get a job offer to get a work permit:
I suppose some here have NEVER taken advantage of networking. But for every immigrant who has never taken advantage of networking, there are hundreds if not thousands of others who have . . . and for a rather significant number of them, that advantage played a role in their path to becoming a Canadian . . . from help getting the educational or work experience background that played a role in qualifying to immigrate . . . to the most prevalent familial networking: being an accompanying family member or a sponsored family class PR.
It seems, though, some are happy to take advantage of the opportunities their networking offers and condemn those who would take advantage of some other kind of networking opportunities. I am NOT the only hypocrite around.
I for sure would not be here, in Canada, which is where I really want to be, but for a good friend who later became my partner and who sponsored me. I have a life now I could not have imagined two or three decades ago. The depth of my gratitude cannot be adequately expressed in words, or perhaps even in deeds.
As noted, who gets to come to Canada depends a great deal on all sorts of advantages some have and BILLIONS of others do not. Not a level playing field. Those who have a problem with this can petition the UN, for what that is worth. Or their God, for what that is worth. Otherwise, I suspect that those who complain loudest about the advantages someone else has had, have themselves enjoyed more than their share of advantages. If possible, I'd offer a tissue and some sympathy. In the meantime, though, the best I can do is share what we can about what the rules are and how they work. At least that part of the equation should balance, everyone getting an opportunity to know the rules and how they work.
Last edited:
I sincerely appreciate your posts because they seem to be very well reasoned, supported, and written by someone who is avowedly not an expert but who appears to have been trained (or read, or articled). However, there are times where I wonder what balances out your utter disdain for everyone here offering opinions and keeps you coming
I’ll second that ,I sincerely appreciate your posts because they seem to be very well reasoned, supported, and written by someone who is avowedly not an expert but who appears to have been trained (or read, or articled). However, there are times where I wonder what balances out your utter disdain for everyone here offering opinions and keeps you coming
It is NO WHERE NEAR true that I harbour "utter disdain for everyone here offering opinions." On the contrary, I read and appreciate scores and scores of posts here . . . from anecdotal reports about personal experiences to informative observations about many various aspects of PR and citizenship issues. The forum is not merely a valuable ongoing source of information for me: What led me into doing what I do here was . . . more than a decade ago now . . . learning some information relevant to my own application for PR which helped me make an important decision that certainly made my own path easier and faster, and may have actually prevented some serious issues. (That goes back to when I was merely a spectator here.) I made an effort to pay-it-forward and have been engaged since.I sincerely appreciate your posts because they seem to be very well reasoned, supported, and written by someone who is avowedly not an expert but who appears to have been trained (or read, or articled). However, there are times where I wonder what balances out your utter disdain for everyone here offering opinions and keeps you coming
There are, though, some views expressed here which need to be challenged. Some which need to be corrected. (And I welcome being corrected . . . I really want to get things as right as we can. Anyone who has read my observations over time should readily see that I have often evolved and in some instances outright changed my view.)
A very common problem here is overstating definitive declarations. Much of this derives from simple misunderstanding, erroneously extrapolating a general proposition from individual experience for example, or similarly poor reasoning. When the proposition or declaration is misleading and it could have a significant impact, and is a subject I follow, and I have time, I offer what I can to clarify or correct. (These days there are only a rather few topics or issues in which I engage, and they tend to be more complex subjects typically involving more nuanced issues.)
As I oft note, for example, many observations here about what is an "acceptable" reason for H&C relief, for PRs who have failed to comply with the RO, are simply NOT true and tend to be misleading. Moreover, those discussions tend to also be tangled in misleading probabilities . . . who gets H&C relief, and more to the point in this particular thread, who PoE officials will waive through versus who is Reported, is NOT a lottery. The odds illuminate the landscape, the context. But they do not come anywhere near close to indicating how it will go. Individual facts and circumstances will have far, far more influence in how it goes. And the difference has huge implications. H&C cases are far more complicated, rife with nuances and exceptions, than can be addressed in tweet-sized observations.
Otherwise, though, I confess, when I perceive anti-immigrant sentiment, including disdain for other immigrants in different situations expressed by immigrants themselves, I tend to be more reactionary. As I acknowledged, in this my hypocrisy follows me like a shadow, there being a tendency to put down those who put down others, especially those putting down immigrants.
Apologies that the sarcasm related to your level of disdain didn't translate well in this medium. Thank you again for your incredibly well researched and well considered contributions.
Sorry I did not get it.
The underlying issues in this particular thread tend to attract more judgmental reaction than others. One could conduct a study into what queries about this (about coming to settle in Canada after failing to comply with the RO) invite friendly versus unfriendly responses. Which I get. When it appears someone is looking for how to game-the-system, that offends many (probably most) who have invested much in the system, as well as those who value fair-play generally.
There is a key difference between using the rules to one's advantage, however, versus engaging in disingenuous schemes (let alone outright deception) to exploit the system. The former is about making a rather uneven, unequal playing field, as level a playing field as possible. Worth doing.
For me, the way Canada embraces immigrants, while far shy of being perfect (which is perhaps an understatement), is at least comparatively one of this country's biggest positives . . . I'd like to see more of this toward its own indigenous population as well, but that is yet another difficult subject which I am totally NOT qualified to address much, except, again, to say I'd like to see more positive ways of embracing the indigenous than it appears Canada so far has.
Got to say, with emphasis: I love this country. Never felt like I had a real home until I lived here. I know that when people ask about your "hometown" that is not about where one lives now . . . but for me, having now been living in this city for the better part of nearly two decades, this is my "hometown." When I go back to where I grew up, as I did recently for a close family member's funeral, I feel like a stranger, a foreigner, an outsider, like someone who does not belong. And I didn't. After becoming an adult, well actually a little before becoming an adult, I started wandering and I wandered for decades (I am an old dude). Finally home now. Oh Canada eh, with a smile.
Good day to all. Yesterday, my family and I crossed the land border of Canada with the United States. There were questions about our absence. All conversations with the officer were on the street near the building. We showed all the documents that explained the reason for our absence. An officer woman took our passports and was absent for about 10 minutes, then brought and let us go. But in the passport stamped on the entry wrote that we have been absent since the end of 2014. She said that this is our problem in the future as we extend our resident cards. No additional documents did not give to sign, the address and phone number did not ask. I understand that we now need to wait 800 days and only then apply for the renewal of our PR cards?
Yes - you need to wait until at least two years have passed before you apply to renew your PR cards. Don't leave Canada until then.
Also make sure that you do not sponsor your children for PR until you have lived in Canada for at least two years.