Hello, I was granted PRTD two weeks back, based on removed as minor. Now I am in Canada and going through the next steps, first of which is to renew PR card, however got bit confused while going through the forum. My PRTD states category R-1, while I found out from this forum the actual one should be RC-1 based on humanitarian ground. What do I do, can I renew my PR card?
As per other posts on the forum, R-1 is for people who have fulfilled residency obligation and RC-1 is for humanitarian grounds. I have read few detailed post on this hence confused. Can anyone on R-1 who has renewed PR card guide me on what documents to submit.
THE QUESTION:
The real question is whether it is prudent to even apply for a PR card, without waiting to be in compliance with the PR Residency Obligation based on having spent at least 730 days IN Canada within the previous five years.
Is there a risk? How much risk? Worth the risk? (Can I stay in Canada for two years without a new PR card?)
WHY THERE IS A QUESTION; Part I:
The RISK is that a PR card application could trigger a new H&C assessment which could have a different outcome, a negative outcome resulting in being issued a 44(1) Report for inadmissibility, due to non-compliance with the PR Residency Obligation. That would require an appeal and WINNING the APPEAL to avoid losing PR status.
Or as
@canuck78 framed it:
The issue is that if the OP applies for a PR card now they could have to prove their H&C reasons again. The next visa officer could decide to refuse the application.
If the H&C case is STRONG, that plus the positive decision to grant a PR TD means the risk should be small.
What's a STRONG H&C case for a PR who has been living abroad with parents while a minor and soon after turning 18, and makes the effort to return to Canada?
Well that
depends on the facts. How long has it been since the PR was last in Canada? Last lived in Canada? How well established was the PR in Canada before being "removed?"
What recent anecdotal reports have alerted us to, and confirmed, is that just the fact of being a landed PR does NOT give every minor a free pass to return to Canada and keep PR status when they turn 18. There are still some
It-Depends factors.
IN CONTRAST . . . in contrast, if you can manage to live in Canada for two years without a PR card, for long enough that there is NO breach of the PR RO, you could then apply for a new PR card with very little or no risk of a negative outcome. Waiting two years is as close as it gets to making the
For-Sure-Bet.
Technically a PR does NOT need a PR card to live in Canada. But there are circumstances in which not having a valid PR card can make things difficult; for example: if the PR does not yet have SIN; qualifying for provincial health care or even obtaining a drivers' license; establishing status to qualify for certain educational opportunities or benefits (such as resident fees).
In any event, the
For-Sure-Bet, the
FOR - SURE way to safeguard PR status is to WAIT for two years before applying for a new PR card. Or at least almost two years.
WHY THERE IS A QUESTION; Part II:
If the visa office had coded the PR Travel Document (technically it is NOT a "visa" but for practical purposes it is similar) indicating it was specifically issued based on H&C grounds, that would constitute a formal decision which conclusively determined there were sufficient H&C reasons to allow you to keep PR status DESPITE having breached the PR Residency Obligation. While that decision would not be absolutely binding on IRCC, it would be very close to binding, close enough there would be very little risk applying for a new PR card sooner rather than waiting two years. Absent some major oversight or a fairly big change in circumstances, IRCC will honor the visa office decision.
So that is why there can be a big difference indicated by the R-1 versus RC-1 coding.
The fact that (apparently) the visa office merely concluded you meet the requirements of a PR does NOT offer you much insurance.
I am not sure why
@canuck78 thinks the visa office decision was "an error." Was the decision intended to be a formal H&C decision, so issuing a PR TD was correct but there was "an error" in how it was coded (should have been coded as granted for H&C reasons)?
OR was there an error in the decision to grant the PR TD? Very different. Either possible. Very different implications for a PR card application made less than two years after the young PR actually comes to Canada. If it was a coding error, no problem proceeding soon with a PR card application. If the PR TD was automatically issued because of the young PR's age, soon after reaching a majority or independence from parents, without consideration of other factors and contrary to how other officers might decide the case, that would elevate the risks applying for a PR card soon.
That said, the visa office decision (even
as-is) probably offers some insurance . . . odds are probably fairly good that given the visa office's issuance of the PR TD, a PR card application will NOT be denied or result in a RO evaluation that reaches a different conclusion. But we do NOT know just how good those odds are.
In particular, the visa office's decision should be clear in your GCMS records, and the fact that you have actually come to Canada and stayed in the meantime (however long that has been), probably means NO problem with a PR card application. But to be clear, "probably" leaves a lot of room for other possibilities, including rather severe possibilities. Like losing PR status.
In particular, the RISK is that a PR card application could trigger a separate, independent assessment of the H&C case and if, say, the young PR was never well-established in a life in Canada before being removed, potentially result in a different outcome.
Coding in the PR TD indicating a formal H&C decision would have solved that since IRCC would most likely (almost but not quite certainly) honor that decision (with very few exceptions, exceptions mostly related to significant changes in circumstances).
WHY THERE IS A QUESTION; Part III:
A clarification of sorts. This part is what underlies the following observation:
Curious about your background. Getting PRTD because you were removed as a minor seems to have anecdotally become more difficult so curious to see who is actually being approved.
Not every
removed-as-a-minor PR is granted a PR TD application even if the application for a TD comes soon after the PR's 18th birthday. Some are denied.
I do not see this as something new even though we have seen more anecdotal reports recently. So far I have not seen
removed-as-a-minor PRs being denied a PR TD
EXCEPT in situations where it is a stretch to say they were "
REMOVED" . . . being "landed" and having briefly visited Canada hardly makes the case the PR was "
REMOVED" as such. And as I have cited in other topics, actually many young PRs have been denied a PR TD in these circumstances going back more than a decade.
What is not so predictable, however, is that among those who landed and only spent a brief period of time in Canada, and otherwise have minimal if any establishment in Canada, it appears SOME will be issued a PR TD and SOME (apparently many) will NOT.
If, for example, you are among the lucky ones who similarly never really lived for any substantial period of your life in Canada, but the visa office nonetheless decided to issue a PR TD, GOOD NEWS, you are in. The rest of the news lacks shine: that could mean a higher RISK if you apply for a PR card.
To be clear, I do not apprehend that young PRs who were actually settled and living in Canada for a good period of time, and then in FACT actually REMOVED from Canada by a parent, should have any problems with getting H&C relief and an opportunity to keep PR status soon after turning 18. And such a PR can probably apply for a new PR card with LOW risk. Even if the return to Canada was made via the U.S. and being waived into Canada without obtaining a PR TD.
BUT H&C cases are almost always tricky. Always difficult to forecast with any degree of precision. If it is possible to avoid a RO decision depending on a favourable H&C assessment, the better odds are indeed avoiding a RO decision . . . at least until the PR has cured the breach by being IN Canada two years within the preceding five.
TOWARD SOME KIND OF CONCLUSIONS, OF A SORT:
WHICH ULTIMATELY MEANS I DID NOT OFFER ANY ANSWERS. I do not have an answer. As I indicated, the answer is largely personal, and depends on your own personal situation. If you have no need to get a PR card anytime soon, the SAFE BET is to wait. The longer the better. If you wait two years, that is the
For-Sure-Bet.
Beyond that the RISKS vary, and they can vary quite a lot depending on many other factors. Like how long you actually lived in Canada. The reasons for being abroad. How long abroad.
