No, they won’t care. They probably just added a quick note of the situation and will simply think you’re being proactive. No reason for suspicion, especially given fixing the record doesn’t benefit you - rather the opposite.
CBSA stamp wrong date
- Thread starter Maysashahin90
- Start date
Yea because the attitude of the cbsa officer was rather impolite and the way he spoke made me feel like I am doing something wrong. He asked about my travels etc and then put me on hold came back and I told him I am well within my obligation he said something that was inaudible but ended with thats fine. I didn't want to ask him to repeat what he said. Then he ended by saying he will leave a note and that the people who will check the system to determine if you were outside for too long will he able to see this note
If you are worried, you can request your GCMS notes. These are the notes the IRCC officer will see when making a decision on your file. Keep in mind, you still have 3 years till applying for a citizenship. If you’re not suspect during these 3 years, any note here will very likely be dismissed.
Ordering gcms is too much I guess specially that the note is probably on the cbsa system and not ircc at all. There is no reason for him or any officer to report me to the ircc at all as I wasn't in breach of any obligations whatsoever so maybe its just for future processes when the ircc refers to the cbsa system they would see the note saying I had the wrong stamp maybe. I hope i didn't screw up things by calling them and I should have kept it the way it is "sigh"
I am really worried even more now that I called them, I dont know why I feel like I didn something wrong eventhough I am obliged by the rules and didnt breach anything
I also concur in the "overthinking" comment by @BOYX
As I said in my previous post:
"I do not mean to suggest that this instance is a big deal. Probably no big deal at all."
For emphasis: NOT likely to be a big deal.
Thus, in regards to . . .
Beyond that, in terms of how a PR approaches things generally, it is NOT that complicated:
Further Observations Regarding Negative Connotations Related to "Manufacturing" Evidence:
There appears to be a tendency to focus on a negative implication in referring to the "manufacturing" of evidence. Let's be clear, that's a clue.
Keeping records is important. Creating (manufacturing) records for the sake of having a record is a good idea. And IRCC specifically advises PRs to keep a "travel journal" for this purpose. See https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/canadian-citizenship/become-canadian-citizen/eligibility/record-trips-outside-canada.html
Note: I am not aware of the website referenced here:
At the webpage I am familiar with (again, see https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/canadian-citizenship/become-canadian-citizen/eligibility/record-trips-outside-canada.html ) there is a link for downloading a template to use as a travel journal.
That is not the same as creating (manufacturing) evidence, creating (manufacturing) documents or entries for the purpose of presenting the document as evidence.
That said, there is NOTHING illegal or inherently fraudulent about creating (manufacturing) ACCURATE, honest documentation, that can be used as evidence.
BUT this leads back to the reaction here to the term "manufacture." And the rather apparent negative connotations evoked.
So, let me reiterate, I do not concur in efforts to manufacture evidence, even accurate evidence.
Make and keep records. For sure. Back-up records even, definitely.
Not a good idea, however, to APPEAR to be gaming things. And yes, appearances matter. Appearances influence perceptions of credibility. Second only to actually complying with the rules and requirements and obligations, the next most important element in transactions with CBSA or IRCC is the PR's credibility.
OVERALL:
Again, PRs who comply with the rules and who play it straight have very little or nothing to worry about. With rare exceptions, PRs do not run into problems with the PR Residency Obligation, or with applications for citizenship, UNLESS there is cause. Neither IRCC nor CBSA engage in gotcha-games. There is no need to do more than comply with the RO, keep a record of all international travel, and otherwise keep the usual, ordinary records that people keep.
As I said in my previous post:
"I do not mean to suggest that this instance is a big deal. Probably no big deal at all."
For emphasis: NOT likely to be a big deal.
Thus, in regards to . . .
No need to worry. Time to let this go. Odds are very good this is NOT a big deal. After all, in the overall scheme of things it should be totally irrelevant.
Beyond that, in terms of how a PR approaches things generally, it is NOT that complicated:
-- comply with PR Residency Obligations
-- -- for insurance, avoid cutting-it-close
-- avoid behavior that could lead to inadmissibility (that is, do not commit crimes)
-- make and keep records, good records (which is NOT the same as going out of one's way to create (make or manufacture) "evidence;" to be addressed further below)
-- wait to apply for citizenship with a GOOD margin over the minimum
Further Observations Regarding Negative Connotations Related to "Manufacturing" Evidence:
There appears to be a tendency to focus on a negative implication in referring to the "manufacturing" of evidence. Let's be clear, that's a clue.
Keeping records is important. Creating (manufacturing) records for the sake of having a record is a good idea. And IRCC specifically advises PRs to keep a "travel journal" for this purpose. See https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/canadian-citizenship/become-canadian-citizen/eligibility/record-trips-outside-canada.html
Note: I am not aware of the website referenced here:
A link would be useful.
At the webpage I am familiar with (again, see https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/canadian-citizenship/become-canadian-citizen/eligibility/record-trips-outside-canada.html ) there is a link for downloading a template to use as a travel journal.
That is not the same as creating (manufacturing) evidence, creating (manufacturing) documents or entries for the purpose of presenting the document as evidence.
That said, there is NOTHING illegal or inherently fraudulent about creating (manufacturing) ACCURATE, honest documentation, that can be used as evidence.
BUT this leads back to the reaction here to the term "manufacture." And the rather apparent negative connotations evoked.
So, let me reiterate, I do not concur in efforts to manufacture evidence, even accurate evidence.
Make and keep records. For sure. Back-up records even, definitely.
Not a good idea, however, to APPEAR to be gaming things. And yes, appearances matter. Appearances influence perceptions of credibility. Second only to actually complying with the rules and requirements and obligations, the next most important element in transactions with CBSA or IRCC is the PR's credibility.
OVERALL:
Again, PRs who comply with the rules and who play it straight have very little or nothing to worry about. With rare exceptions, PRs do not run into problems with the PR Residency Obligation, or with applications for citizenship, UNLESS there is cause. Neither IRCC nor CBSA engage in gotcha-games. There is no need to do more than comply with the RO, keep a record of all international travel, and otherwise keep the usual, ordinary records that people keep.
The notes for CBSA & GCMS are the same. And I disagree that it is too much. If it helps with your worries, then it is definitely worth it.
Thank you for your detailed reply
This is the link https://www.cbsa-asfc.gc.ca/travel-voyage/pik-bip-eng.html?wbdisable=true and in it cbsa states this
Passport stamping for permanent residents and foreign nationals
This is the link https://www.cbsa-asfc.gc.ca/travel-voyage/pik-bip-eng.html?wbdisable=true and in it cbsa states this
Passport stamping for permanent residents and foreign nationals
- The CBSA no longer stamps all passports at airports with Primary Inspection Kiosks.
- If you need a stamp in your passport as a proof of entry into Canada you must request a stamp from a border services officer after completing a kiosk transaction.
Thank you for your detailed reply
This is the link https://www.cbsa-asfc.gc.ca/travel-voyage/pik-bip-eng.html?wbdisable=true and in it cbsa states this
Passport stamping for permanent residents and foreign nationals
- The CBSA no longer stamps all passports at airports with Primary Inspection Kiosks.
- If you need a stamp in your passport as a proof of entry into Canada you must request a stamp from a border services officer after completing a kiosk transaction.
Yes I agree, but do you see a reason for me to worry thats my question. A note even if its there I have 4 years on my pr card so by no means I am cutting it short so asking for a stamp does make me look suspicious, I dont know
Relax. You are overthinking. You'll be fine if you do as others advise here - mainly have a buffer anyway.
Frankly I wouldn't have bothered replying to this thread at all - except that I thought you were asking if there was some way to benefit from having the three days extra, as if you were really close on the residency obligation.
If I'd known that the entire issue was if having a phsyical stamp date a few days off from the actual would cause a problem, I'd not have bothered. The answer is NO as long as you use the actual date.
Even a small slightly annoyed note from a cbsa officer (if it exists - which it may well not) will NOT override you having all your dates in order and documents etc.
It's done, so stop worrying. The highest likelihood of all is that there is nothing at all in there and no-one will ever think about it again except for you. I guarantee the officer forgot about it five minutes later - you probably should too.
NO. Stop thinking about this, it's not serving any purpose but to stress you.
Thank you for your reply, appreciated
The note is there as I called to ammend the stamp, the officer told me he will leave a note saying that the stamp date was wrong and was 3 days earlier than it should be so my concern is that maybe he wrote.slmetning else too
I was referring to the initial interaction.
Ok, so now there's a note - and it says what exactly? That you seemed worried that the date was wrong?
And you were correcting it to a later date? (How would that help you?)
And how is this going to affect your application if you have lots of extra days and documentation to show you have complied with the obligations? Answer: it almost certainly won't.
They're probably just confused that you spent the time on this at all.
As am I.