2020 applicants with Background verification- In Progress
- Thread starter Canadiann2020
- Start date
I'm 2019 applicant and got my test invite after 20 months and nothing after that, now its 24 months in total
Hey guys who have/had applied for notes from CBSA ? If you have received them can you share the background related content here. Now literally they have started issuing test invites to 2021 so that means we will be like 2019 who left behind and forgotten.
I received cbsa report last week. There was a very brief table in the file indicating security check in progress with CSIS. It doesn’t look like cbsa is involved in background check, at least not for me.
Yes, it was mentioned in GCMS note I received from IRCC before as well. Security has started about a month after application was in progress
Few days after start date lol. CIC agent was saying due date indicated there is meaningless.
nothing is meaningful than, AOR, filed date, in process nothing. They will not process ours in 365 days, lol ! But at least now we know it’s a long walk for us.
My security section was blank. It only shows my UCI, name, that's it. Rest is blank.
I’m not even thinking about having it finished in one year time line. I’m hopeful 1.5 year ...
Hawat, from your notes from IRCC and CBSA what do you see if this background (security) has anything to do with the file transfer to the local office?
2nd which office initiated this BG checks Sydne or your local office?
3rd when was your file received to local office and when this BG was initiated ( I know this is somewhat a stu..d question) as normally file is put into process after Bg checks and is transferred to local office!
The BG check was initiated by CSIS while the file was still in Sydney, before file transfer. File transfer to local office was three months after BG started
Last edited:
While the article's slant, and what many may be getting from it, is largely focused on the negatives, the statistics cited should be seen as a big positive. In particular, if it is true that 63,600 applicants had been invited to take the oath in just the first four months of 2021, and a similar number scheduled to take the knowledge of Canada test, that suggests IRCC is approaching par . . . processing and completing applications at a rate close to that of incoming new applications. That suggests the backlog has not been growing, or at least not by much, since sometime last year.
Those who have had applications in process for a year plus already may not perceive cause to celebrate in this news, but they should. As bureaucracies are wont to do generally, CIC and IRCC have long had difficulty dealing with applications bogged down in a backlog. So there is nothing unusual indicated, let alone anything untoward insinuated, by the fact that those bogged down in the backlog are suffering a still excruciatingly slow process. That does not alleviate the pain or dissipate the frustration. But it should be some relief to know that going forward IRCC should be able to, and will likely begin to make progress in resolving backlogged applications, that in particular the backlog is not increasing and there is little or no impediment to getting the backlog applications processed.
It is simply not true, for example, "Nobody cares about the remaining few." It is about how bureaucracies tend to operate, the hierarchy of priorities in a less than flexible processing structure. Unfortunately, however, my sense is that this is not about a "few" but many tens of thousands of applicants. I have not seen reliable statistics about the size of the backlog, but my sense is the number of applications "in process" could be as much as or even more than a quarter million.
In any event, in particular, at this stage, with much of the government still handcuffed by measures related to the pandemic, that IRCC is approaching par in processing applications is very positive news.
As for some of the underlying elements in the article's negative slant:
As much as a delay in obtaining a Canadian passport imposes hardship on PRs with international travel needs, including those with such needs in their employment, the policies and practices, driven in significant part by the purposes underlying the Canadian immigration system, including its path to citizenship for PRs, are not oriented toward giving this much priority. The path to citizenship is simply not there, not intended, to address or facilitate the international travel needs of immigrants. Maybe it should be. As illustrated in that article, this poses a hardship for many. So many vehemently urge this should be a more important concern. But so far all signs suggest it is not. This is reflected in the Charter regarding mobility rights, statutory provisions such as those prescribing the PR RO, and extensively in the case law.
So, as hard as this aspect of the delay is, it is not likely to have much weight in the government's approach to priorities in dealing with the backlogged citizenship applications. Unless and until a PR actually becomes a citizen, until the oath is taken, a PR's international travel is mostly subject to the passport the PR carries and the rules and laws of other countries. However things should be, this is how it is.
No reason any applicant caught in the backlog should feel they are "being singled out" let alone "for no reason." Sure, of course, some applicants are singled out. Some are bogged down in more extensive background screening. Some bogged down in RQ-related non-routine processing. Among various actual REASONS for why this or that applicant is, in a sense, singled out and subject to longer processing timelines.
But the vast majority of those in the backlog are there largely due to a fluke in timing, where their application was in the process compared to the impact of the global pandemic, and its fallout. Not singled out except, perhaps, by the gods, for those who imagine such things.
No profound wisdom or crystal ball necessary to realize that yes, on average and probably by a lot, those who apply with a good margin over the minimum have better odds of smooth sailing. This is not to say a big margin is any guarantee of smooth sailing or faster processing, not at all. Many factors figure into how things are likely to go for a particular individual. But no rocket science needed to map the trajectory of risks for low-margin applicants. And even more so if and when there are unusual stresses imposed on the process, like, say, a global pandemic.
Back to the primary subject of this topic: Background Verifications --
In reference to these and additional posts above . . .
Perhaps it is just some confusion in the words used, but grant citizenship application background checks are NOT "initiated" by CSIS. CPC-Sydney makes a *referral* to both the RCMP and CSIS requesting formal background clearances, for criminal and security clearances respectively. I do not know for sure when this referral is done during those procedures performed in CPC-Sydney (opening application to the transfer to local office, as reflected in AOR and In-Process as the bookends for what CPC-Sydney does), but the referral is made there and in the meantime the application itself continues on its processing path within IRCC . . . as I have noted before, once the file is "in process" the transfer to the local office has taken place . . . EVEN IF for a long while the local office does not actually open or deal with or do anything that even shows it is in the local office.
REMEMBER, even if the copy of GCMS notes an applicant obtains through the ATIP process shows this or that clearance as done, or complete, these are NOT for-sure done or complete unless and until the oath is taken. Cannot say it often enough, or emphatically enough: getting this information is unnecessary, rarely the least bit helpful. Getting worked up trying to decipher the meaning of the codes in the GCMS records is about as pointless as pointless can be. Ain't gonna help you make any decisions. Ain't gonna tell you how long this or that will take, let alone when the oath will be scheduled.
REMEMBER, notwithstanding call centre agents referring to the application waiting for background clearances, with some exceptions and in some isolated instances, it is RARE for IRCC to actually be waiting for clearances before proceeding to the next step. Clearances are done in parallel with application processing.
-- The isolated instances involve applicants for whom a more extensive or intensive screening has been implemented, such as a referral to an overseas office to conduct additional checks, or an applicant for whom there is some indication of a possible prohibition which needs to be investigated
-- The most common exception is if a clearance is outstanding, or if the Citizenship Officer reviewing the application in the process of making a decision sees a reason to update a clearance, just when the applicant is about to be scheduled for the oath; and if this is the situation, other than in those isolated instances noted above, this delay is typically SHORT . . . the update of clearances is routine
Finally, Recourse For Those Subject to Procedurally Unfair Delays:
There is recourse for applicants who actually are subject to procedurally unfair delays -- the application for a Writ of Mandamus process. That's a whole other subject. Often just a proper demand can result in resolution. But to make a proper demand virtually requires an experienced lawyer, and can be expensive, and only works if there has been a procedurally unfair action or delay under the law, which tends to not embrace what many feel is "unfair."
Last edited:
