Misrepresentation? PR Renewal - Travel histroy

[snowrding1]

Hello great people,

I don't know if I'm posting in the right forum, but this seemed the most appropriate. I'm in a bit of a pickle, and I'm not sure what to do. Please help me with your suggestions.

I renewed my PR several years ago. Back then, I was asked to submit my since 18 travel histroy. It was a long list! When doing so, I had mistakenly ommitted travels to one country that doesn't stamp my passport on arrival. What I did was I just went through my passport and listed all travel dates according to the stamps on it. Will this ommission count as misrepresenation?

I will be applying for citizenship soon, and I don't want to submit conflicting information because I have been there. I tried my best but I also don't have the travel dates to this country since I have no stamps and no other means to find it (no bank statements or etc.) all I have are some social media posts and photos that might help me bullpark the two visits in the last 5 years (luckly it's also the citizenship eligibility period). One of them was 6 days and another was around 10 days.

Basically I was visiting my family back home for a month or two (stamps available for that period and included in the travel history), and during that time, we would all go together to a neighbouring country to visit grandparents and extended family for a week or so (no stamps and not declared in travel history).

What should I do?
1- Should I attempt updating that since 18 travel histroy I submitted to IRCC years ago? (Again I can only bullpark visits in the last 5 years not older ones, but I think that's okay since it is in line with the 5 year eligibility period for my citizenship application.)
2- Ignore the older travel history and send new and accurate information with the upcoming citizenship application.

Thanks!

Note: This almost happened every time I went back home (Before moving to Canada it was almost yearly).

 

[armoured]

I got lost a little in your narrative above. At any rate, I would still boil this down to the following response:

1) The key thing in either case is whether this new information changes the number of days in Canada and especially your compliance/non-compliance with residency obligation and the days required for citizenship. (If it changes number of days in Canada somehow below compliance, you have more serious problems)/

2) If so, probably sufficient to submit corret information (as correct as you can) this time AND a short letter of explanation that you neglected to include these 'side trips' to neighbouring country in your PR card renewal [because reasons eg I forgot or whatever]. AND this does not affect number of days in Canada. If you don't know exact days, estimate as best you can and disclose.

The real answer is that this is probably not material (unless that side trip country is a problem like North Korea or something) and by disclosing it to IRCC you've almost certainly pre-empted any claim you intended to deceive them by omitting.

3) You might want to ask in citizenship forum here.

 

[jakklondon]

What should I do?
1- Should I attempt updating that since 18 travel histroy I submitted to IRCC years ago? (Again I can only bullpark visits in the last 5 years not older ones, but I think that's okay since it is in line with the 5 year eligibility period for my citizenship application.)
2- Ignore the older travel history and send new and accurate information with the upcoming citizenship application.

Thanks!

Note: This almost happened every time I went back home (Before moving to Canada it was almost yearly).

You should consult licensed immigration attorney.

 

[snowrding1]

I got lost a little in your narrative above. At any rate, I would still boil this down to the following response:

1) The key thing in either case is whether this new information changes the number of days in Canada and especially your compliance/non-compliance with residency obligation and the days required for citizenship. (If it changes number of days in Canada somehow below compliance, you have more serious problems)/

2) If so, probably sufficient to submit corret information (as correct as you can) this time AND a short letter of explanation that you neglected to include these 'side trips' to neighbouring country in your PR card renewal [because reasons eg I forgot or whatever]. AND this does not affect number of days in Canada. If you don't know exact days, estimate as best you can and disclose.

The real answer is that this is probably not material (unless that side trip country is a problem like North Korea or something) and by disclosing it to IRCC you've almost certainly pre-empted any claim you intended to deceive them by omitting.

3) You might want to ask in citizenship forum here.

Sorry if I confused you. Can I clarify any particular point?

To be clear, this does not affect my compliance days at all (I did not add them partly because of that) and because I don't have stamps on my passport either to get accurate dates or show them (They are side trips during the same absence). So I guess this answers your 1)

I wonder if I'm overthinking this and by bringing it up to IRCC I will be creating more problems than necessary. (Do they revisit past PR renewal applications that have been approved?)

 

[armoured]

Okay, clear. Disclosing it is better than not disclosing it. It is probably not material anyway. By disclosing you are to some degree protecting yourself.

I f you're really worried, see a lawyer. But you're not the first to have forgotten a trip and unless it was a trip to commit war crimes it probably doesn't matter much. (Would it have somehow been advantageous to you to not disclose your trip to ...)

 

[jakklondon]

I am not licensed in Canada attorney, I can't give any legal advise. And I don't give disclaimer out of apprehension that I could be held legally liable if anyone listened to me. I am under US jurisdiction, and anything I say on public forum is protected speech for most part. But I still make these disclaimers, out of sincere concern for you and others, that you might inadvertently take my posts for legal advise and act on it. Please don't. Seek legal consultation with licensed attorney if you need legal help.

As to question OP posts, as non-lawyer I don't see simple answer here. Error was made when submitting PR card renewal application. OP didn't disclose the name of a country she visited while visiting third country. It's like forgetting to say that one visited France while going in and out of Italy (there are no borders in EU and you don't get your passport stamped when going from one to another EU country). Does that affect PR Card app eligibility? No. But it could be material if someone failed to disclose visit to Syria and Iraq while ISIS controlled parts of it. Assuming the latter doesn't apply to OP, does it mean he is on the clear? Unfortunately, not knowing all the governing regulations it's just layman's best guess. May be it's not a big deal. But may be it is. Who knows.
Is it now necessary to inform CIC of omission? Or will it open Pandora's box? Again, who knows. Many people make sure bet that bureaucrats are not good at catching little things (and this is true for most part, internally large organizations are far cry from what outsiders think of it, and there are a lot of incompetent people working on low level jobs), but again, you never know. You may make your bet and get in a lot of trouble with it.
So, it's hard to say if it's better to just forget about it, or to now inform CIC of omission made earlier. Only a good, experienced attorney can answer for sure if the omission is material (or, even if not material, if it's something that could potentially trigger a problem in future).
That's why it's important not to make errors when submitting initial paperwork, so you don't have to deal with dilemmas and questions later. Remember all the fine print, "I swear it's all true" sort of lines before signature line? Those mean business and come back to bite you if you ever sign a paper without giving a second thought to it. It's hard to argue that you didn't know what you were signing under.
And if error has been made, it's better to ask a seasoned professional for advise how to deal with it. Rely on laymen's best guess at your own risk.

 

[canuck78]

I am not licensed in Canada attorney, I can't give any legal advise. And I don't give disclaimer out of apprehension that I could be held legally liable if anyone listened to me. I am under US jurisdiction, and anything I say on public forum is protected speech for most part. But I still make these disclaimers, out of sincere concern for you and others, that you might inadvertently take my posts for legal advise and act on it. Please don't. Seek legal consultation with licensed attorney if you need legal help.

As to question OP posts, as non-lawyer I don't see simple answer here. Error was made when submitting PR card renewal application. OP didn't disclose the name of a country she visited while visiting third country. It's like forgetting to say that one visited France while going in and out of Italy (there are no borders in EU and you don't get your passport stamped when going from one to another EU country). Does that affect PR Card app eligibility? No. But it could be material if someone failed to disclose visit to Syria and Iraq while ISIS controlled parts of it. Assuming the latter doesn't apply to OP, does it mean he is on the clear? Unfortunately, not knowing all the governing regulations it's just layman's best guess. May be it's not a big deal. But may be it is. Who knows.
Is it now necessary to inform CIC of omission? Or will it open Pandora's box? Again, who knows. Many people make sure bet that bureaucrats are not good at catching little things (and this is true for most part, internally large organizations are far cry from what outsiders think of it, and there are a lot of incompetent people working on low level jobs), but again, you never know. You may make your bet and get in a lot of trouble with it.
So, it's hard to say if it's better to just forget about it, or to now inform CIC of omission made earlier. Only a good, experienced attorney can answer for sure if the omission is material (or, even if not material, if it's something that could potentially trigger a problem in future).
That's why it's important not to make errors when submitting initial paperwork, so you don't have to deal with dilemmas and questions later. Remember all the fine print, "I swear it's all true" sort of lines before signature line? Those mean business and come back to bite you if you ever sign a paper without giving a second thought to it. It's hard to argue that you didn't know what you were signing under.
And if error has been made, it's better to ask a seasoned professional for advise how to deal with it. Rely on laymen's best guess at your own risk.

It is always better to be upfront and correct your error instead of allowing IRCC to potentially catch your error.

 

[jakklondon]

It is always better to be upfront and correct your error instead of allowing IRCC to potentially catch your error.

Absolutely not true if you apply this statement blanketly. What goes without dispute is that it is imperative not to make error and not to put your signature under any document, especially very important document, unless you are 100% sure that it's true/correct to the best of your knowledge.
But once the error is made, there are lots of variables to consider. Truth then becomes like medicine with side effects. Some side effects of medicine can kill, and one will ask doctor (in instance involving legal matters a lawyer), what the risks of taking medicine or not taking it are. And then decide (as most people do when it comes to medical decisions). It becomes tough life/death question, and therefore it's best to avoid it by not getting sick in the first place (in legal context, by not getting yourself in such a predicament where you have to make such choices).

 

[armoured]

Unfortunately, not knowing all the governing regulations it's just layman's best guess. May be it's not a big deal. But may be it is. Who knows.
...
Again, who knows.
...
but again, you never know. You may make your bet and get in a lot of trouble with it.
...
So, it's hard to say

Man, for someone who so frequently makes it explicit he doesn't know what he's talking about ("but who knows?"), and then quite often demonstrates it by giving terrible advice and showing he doesn't have the slightest idea...

... and therefore it's best to avoid it by not getting sick in the first place

...you're quite aggressive and certain about giving utterly useless post-facto admonitions that one shouldn't have ever committed a mistake in the first place. Thanks, Sherlock. Yep, mistakes are to be avoided.

This case is pretty simple. It's probably not a big deal. The cases where it might have been an issue (travel to war zones etc) were already addressed. (If you travelled to war zones and didn't disclose, you have much bigger problems and should definitely seek legal advice).

Otherwise - better to disclose.

And best of all to ignore such exceedingly general and useless 'advice'.

But sure, see a lawyer.

 

[jakklondon]

It's a sign of intelligence to admit ones' ignorance, and it's a sign of utter ignorance and stupidity to always feel self-righteous and believe that one "knows it all". Let the readers decide who is who.

And, in matters where certainty exists (or one has certainty and confidence to express it), no reservations are due. Bold confidence and utter disregard for slimy semantics in such instances are also a sign of intelligence paired with courage and character. Not for ignored ones to understand.

 

[dpenabill]

I will be applying for citizenship soon, and I don't want to submit conflicting information because I have been there. I tried my best but I also don't have the travel dates to this country since I have no stamps and no other means to find it (no bank statements or etc.) all I have are some social media posts and photos that might help me bullpark the two visits in the last 5 years (luckly it's also the citizenship eligibility period). One of them was 6 days and another was around 10 days.

Your situation does not appear to be at all problematic.

Just be as accurate and complete as possible going forward, including in the citizenship application, and that should easily suffice. Odds are there will be NO questions raised, but you can be prepared to acknowledge and correct the discrepancies if for some reason there are questions (which, again, are simply not at all likely).

I generally do not give advice, but sometimes somethings are more or less obvious. Unless there is something else going on, what you describe does not suggest any cause for concern. No need to add a supplemental explanation, as to omitting additional countries visited during an absence from Canada in the previous PR card application. Again, you can be prepared to acknowledge and correct the discrepancies if it comes up, but that is not likely to happen.

Details can matter, of course, which I discussed in some depth in the Citizenship topic where you posed a similar query. It would be different, for example, if you report different dates of absences in one application versus what was reported in the other. But it appears that is not the situation.

I did not directly respond to your query there, but my post there, partially quoted below, should help you answer your question for yourself.

See post in this topic: https://www.canadavisa.com/canada-immigration-discussion-board/threads/should-the-presence-calculator-be-treated-as-a-travel-history-declaration.759778/#post-9980220

There is little or no indication that IRCC will allege an individual made a material misrepresentation based on the individual's failure to list or disclose countries the individual visited in addition to the primary destination during an absence from Canada.

Obviously, the best approach is to follow the instructions and disclose additional countries visited during an absence from Canada. And going forward, in making any further submissions to IRCC, the better approach is to do one's best to accurately and completely provide information. With some exceptions, this is true even if the individual has previously failed to fully disclose such information in previous submissions.

If an applicant has failed to previously disclose such information, NO NEED to panic, and actually not even much cause to worry. UNLESS the omission was a substantial one and is misleading or deceptive. For the vast majority of individuals in this situation, all the applicant needs to do is be prepared to acknowledge the oversight or mistake, and be prepared to correct the information if asked about it. As someone noted, for example, a processing agent might notice there is a passport entry for a country not disclosed in the physical presence calculation travel history and ask about that. NOT a big deal, not a problem, so long as it fell within a disclosed absence, the applicant acknowledges the oversight, and it does not otherwise appear intended to mislead or deceive.

See more in-depth discussion there about credibility, misrepresentation, and how omissions can range from the insignificant to the serious.


NOTE: this particular part of the forum has been suffering a barrage of misinformation, nonsense, and distraction from a particular American who is not a resident of Canada, has not been one for at least a long time, is largely ignorant of Canadian immigration rules and policies and practices . . . albeit like a Trumpian anti-truther populates some posts with bits of actual facts, largely taken from what veteran and knowledgeable participants here have posted, in an apparent effort to disguise the nefarious troll agenda. Best to ignore the jakkassistic bombast.

 

[jakklondon]

 

[snowrding1]

Hello @armoured, @canuck78, and @dpenabill,

Thank you all so much for your efforts and contributions. Having this forum is a bless, and I'm grateful I was able to think aloud about this with you. Here's what I decided I will do:

I will be reporting the more accurate information on my citizenship application in the absences section, and I have prepared the rough estimate of my visit dates. I will use these estimates in case it becomes necessary later and to be prepared to acknowledge the oversight if for some reason there are questions from IRCC. But for the sake of simplicity I will not be sending an explanation letter, in part to avoid confusing people over there and drawing unnecessary attention to minor issues and blowing this out of proportion.

I've double checked the presence calculator, and at the end of the day, the main purpose of declaring absences is to calculate days away, not necessarily show exact travel dates in the case of going to second countries during the same absence. The form doesn't even instruct to show each travel separately in the case of visiting multiple countries, all they ask for is to say where and not when you entered and exited exactly from each place. As pointed by @dpenabill here:

A mere list suffices, as in stating "also visited XX country, YY country, ZZ country."

Thanks again, especially to you @dpenabill for the lengthy and complete explanation both here and on the other post.