OVERALL:
Reporting ALL trips, getting most return dates right and the remainder CLOSE, and applying with a bigger than usual margin, should be OK. Unless there are other lurking issues or causes for IRCC officials to have concern, this will almost certainly be OK.
For those who failed to keep good records and need to reconstruct travel history, the CBSA travel history should enable the PR to identify and report ALL trips, and other resources can be used to get most return dates right and the remainder CLOSE.
If the prospective applicant cannot confidently report ALL trips and get most return dates right and the remainder CLOSE, they might want to consider the further observations below.
I have met the physical presence requirement since about 6 months ago, so I feel that I have more than enough days to apply for citizenship now. However . .
Further Observations (For those prospective applicants who cannot confidently report ALL trips and get most return dates right and the remainder CLOSE):
Note: many applicants fail to be entirely accurate in their presence calculation travel history, but unless it appears to be an error that means the applicant was short of the requirement, or it appears the applicant's information cannot be trusted generally,
minor mistakes do not ordinarily cause a problem.
More significant mistakes may trigger RQ-related non-routine processing, but again unless it appears there are errors that mean the applicant was short of the requirement, or it appears the applicant's information cannot be trusted generally (especially if officials perceive the applicant to be evasive or deceptive), that should be one of the less intrusive forms of RQ (Residence Questionnaire) and not pose much of a problem other than some delay in getting to the oath.
These days a prospective applicant for citizenship should be able to for-sure report ALL trips, even if the PR failed to keep proper records of international travel, because a PR can obtain a copy of their CBSA travel history records through the ATIP process, and those records will almost always include ALL dates the PR entered Canada. So at the least the PR should be able to report ALL trips in the presence calculation. Then using other resources, such as those referenced by other members here, the prospective applicant should be able to get close to reporting entry dates.
If the prospective applicant is not certain, depending on how many trips the applicant is not certain about, depending on how close the applicant is confident they can be, assuming they are confident their return date (date of entry into Canada) is within a couple or so days, the applicant can add something like "
not certain of precise entry date" into the reasons box for those trips the applicant is not certain about, and be sure to apply with a bigger margin than most need (recognizing most will be prudent to have a month margin, often plus some).
That is: be sure to
-- report EVERY trip;
-- get the return dates close, as close as possible;
-- acknowledge extent of uncertainty, and
-- and wait to apply with a bigger margin
Whether to wait even longer, such as waiting long enough the prospective applicant has kept an exact record of all trips over a period of time which itself fully covers the minimum 1095 days of presence in Canada, is a very personal decision. Most should not need to do this, especially for someone who made as few trips abroad as merely ten or so (many Americans who are PRs in Canada, and others as well, regularly make more than that each year).
That decision should take into consideration many factors which will vary considerably from person to person. Again, MOST will not need to wait much if any longer than it takes to have a good size margin, but that depends on making sure to report ALL trips, and getting the return dates quite close.
Some Background and Analysis; Credibility Matters:
There is no substitute for an accurate and complete record of travel history.
There is only ONE for-sure source of an accurate and complete record of the applicant's travel history: that individual's own personal record of ALL dates of exit and dates of entry and attendant details (list of countries visited during the trip abroad in addition to the destination country, purpose of the trip).
Reminder: the PR who will be applying is
the ONE and ONLY person in the whole world who was for-sure there each and every time that person exited Canada, each and every time that person entered Canada. A PR is the ONE-BEST source of this information.
If this record is not available (for whatever reason, ranging from failure to keep such a record to loss of the record), obviously that makes it more difficult for a prospective citizenship applicant to present the evidence needed to meet the applicant's burden of proving actual presence in Canada. Decision-makers like to have the BEST source of information. If the BEST source is not available, or otherwise appears to not be entirely reliable, that tends to weaken the case.
The looming question is: how much more difficult is it when the applicant does not have a complete and accurate record of travel history?
There is NO general answer to this question. It varies greatly from one person to another depending on the particular details. As most of the other observations about this subject reference and illustrate, a lot can depend on the extent to which the PR can reconstruct travel history from other sources. There are other factors as well, including a key one you recognize which is also referenced by others here: the size of the applicant's margin over the minimum requirement.
The impact of omissions, discrepancies, mistakes, and such, will also vary considerably. Most attention in this forum tends to be about mistakes that might affect the total calculation and whether an error could result in the applicant falling short of the physical presence requirement, noting that one day short means the application MUST be denied. A margin above the minimum can protect against this. HOWEVER, just as important, and in many situations more importantly, is whether there is reason for IRCC to have concerns about how reliable a reporter the applicant is. There is no fixed formula for identifying when IRCC will doubt the applicant's credibility (the reliability of the applicant's accounting of facts), but if and when IRCC officials perceive that information the applicant has submitted deviates from the probable facts in a manner that raises concerns about the applicant's credibility, that will elevate the risks of serious RQ-related issues.
Reconstructing travel history from other sources; the good news in this regard:
The good news in this regard is that for most PRs, virtually all but for anomalies (remembering
stuff-happens), the CBSA travel history should be both accurate and complete in regards to dates of entry into Canada. This enables the PR to at least identify and reconstruct ALL trips abroad. This is critical. While IRCC recognizes that applicants make mistakes, and allows for some of that, some mistakes will obviously have a bigger impact than others. The failure to list a trip altogether tends to be a bigger mistake, in multiple respects.
Credibility Matters, Credibility Matters, Credibility Matters:
An applicant must absolutely meet the requirements. The applicant needs to properly complete the application forms and submit required documents. The applicant must properly respond to notices and appear as and when scheduled. THE NEXT MOST IMPORTANT FACTOR, and make no mistake it is critically important, IS THAT CREDIBILITY MATTERS.
Many think about credibility in terms of honesty, the difference between someone truthful versus someone who is evasive or deceptive. And yes that is a difference that makes a difference, a big difference. If and when IRCC officials perceive an applicant is evasive or deceptive, that alone can totally sabotage the case. If a person is perceived to be dishonest about one thing, that means it is reasonable to discount everything that person reports unless there is other objective evidence of it.
But credibility is broader than that. It is about the extent to which a person can be relied on to be a RELIABLE reporter of facts, not just an honest reporter, but a reliable reporter. Innocent mistakes do not constitute misrepresentation (any finding of misrepresentation is a stand alone ground for denying an application). But a lot of mistakes, or big mistakes, can mean the person is not reliably reporting the facts, and cannot be relied on to be a reliable reporter of facts. That will hurt and can hurt a lot.
So, in providing information in the application, including the travel history, it warrants remembering that more is at stake than just those particular details. The applicant's credibility is always on the line.
