I don't unfortunately have much to add. Some countries consistently have issues, I don't know about China. Can also depend on job and other aspects. But it could be his response will clear things up before long.
CSIS and CBSA notes for Background Check
- Thread starter thecoolguysam
- Start date
Thank you very much for your inputs.
My dad's job is electrician. He did not get enough education, so his job is very simple and does not have technical skills. Back 60 years ago, if the rural people wants a permanent job in cities, the only way is to attend conscripts for several years. That is what my dad did. He got a permanent job until retirement.
The company that he worked was bankrupt more than 10 years ago.
Mine have the same timeline. Your case is sponsor parent that is so simple and easy but why have it taken so long?
Hi folks,
Looking for some advice as I have explored all avenues to get information from IRCC and all have been unfruitful (GCMS notes pending but doubt those will have an impact)
I applied with my wife and son: son on wife’s application, linked their application to mine. We got the test invite in September and cleared by end September.
On November 7, my status got updated to all items cleared with only citizenship oath pending. My wife got a fingerprint request which were submitted and received by IRCC on December 2, 2024. Since then her background check and prohibitions has been in progress.
What I find odd is why her background check is taking so long, as due to the nature of my job, I have had to her background check completed as well: not regular background check, detailed one where they ask whereabouts of parents, siblings, their employment, employment proofs and legal ids.
I tried calling but they said just said that they have all information required. I tried the web form as well. They say that I am still within the average processing time but they just keep on increasing the average time month on month so that statement is stale.
any information anyone can provide will be greatly appreciated.
Looking for some advice as I have explored all avenues to get information from IRCC and all have been unfruitful (GCMS notes pending but doubt those will have an impact)
I applied with my wife and son: son on wife’s application, linked their application to mine. We got the test invite in September and cleared by end September.
On November 7, my status got updated to all items cleared with only citizenship oath pending. My wife got a fingerprint request which were submitted and received by IRCC on December 2, 2024. Since then her background check and prohibitions has been in progress.
What I find odd is why her background check is taking so long, as due to the nature of my job, I have had to her background check completed as well: not regular background check, detailed one where they ask whereabouts of parents, siblings, their employment, employment proofs and legal ids.
I tried calling but they said just said that they have all information required. I tried the web form as well. They say that I am still within the average processing time but they just keep on increasing the average time month on month so that statement is stale.
any information anyone can provide will be greatly appreciated.
In recent two years, security screening is longer than before even for old parents.
To be honest, if you applied for your family's citizenship in the last 6-8 months, I wouldn't worry about it. There are people who have waited for a WAY longer (including myself, who is already in this hell for 2 years). In addition they asked for fingerprints, so by definition that's non-routine, which can take as much time as IRCC decide is appropriate.
I agree overall, but ... there's 'non-routine' and then there's really non-routine. Your two year wait is very much non-routine.
While asking for fingerprints is not 'routine' in the sense that it's not done for all, it seems that they ask for fingerprints from a fairly stable percentage of applicants - and often enough, it doesn't really result in much of a delay (at least from time when the fingerprints are submitted).
In other words: people shouldn't freak that being asked to submit fingerprints automatically means that their file will take much longer than the estimated time period. It clearly doesn't mean that.
(More prosaically IRCC seems to often use 'non-routine' to mean files that take longer than the estimated period - which borders on being a useless tautology, but at any rate is clearly not the same meaning as for the fingerprints).
Last edited:
IRCC had a page specifically note what would make a file "non-routine" and asking for fingerprints is one of them. I think they have secretly removed that page due to too many people questioning their processes when pointing at that page. For example, my file never triggered any points on that non-routine page, but somehow my file is effectively non-routine. Every time I point that out to IRCC, they didn't seem too thrilled.
Thanks for the responses @GFLiam and @armoured.
I agree with the premise of the non-routine application, however, there should be something that reflects that in the GCMS notes.
Two years for waiting is extremely long and I hope that it gets resolved for you quickly.
exploring other forums and a few immigration lawyers they have suggested that it might be better to engage a lawyer. They stated that if I am certain that I dont have anything that can hold up my citizenship grant i.e. criminal conviction or extradition from another country then it might just be that the application has hit a dead spot and engaging an immigration lawyers may get someone to look at it again.
i will write for gcms notes again and will keep the folks posted here. Wishing all of us good luck.
I agree with the premise of the non-routine application, however, there should be something that reflects that in the GCMS notes.
Two years for waiting is extremely long and I hope that it gets resolved for you quickly.
exploring other forums and a few immigration lawyers they have suggested that it might be better to engage a lawyer. They stated that if I am certain that I dont have anything that can hold up my citizenship grant i.e. criminal conviction or extradition from another country then it might just be that the application has hit a dead spot and engaging an immigration lawyers may get someone to look at it again.
i will write for gcms notes again and will keep the folks posted here. Wishing all of us good luck.
Unfortunately there is usually extremely little clarity when the hold-up is due to security checks. And the records on any hold-ups there are basically now shown in gcms notes, or can only be 'found' by triangulating (reading tea leaves) in the gcms.
I'm unclear from your other posts if this applies to your case or you're referring to someone else's file.
Yes, basically this is mandamus or formulating the correspondence (threat) to file mandamus. Sometimes it works.
Could you pls explain more about "can only be 'found' by triangulating (reading tea leaves) in the gcms. " Many Thanks!
As far as I'm aware you will not find specific notes in the gcms system saying 'this file is non-routine' nor 'this is going to take a very long time due to security checks.'
Instead, mostly what may be found are traces of things that have been left out (esp things they dont' disclose under security exemptions), mentions in this context which are somewhat out of ordinary (references to security exemptions are mostly bog-standard, but sometimes the reference to a specific para of the relevant act hings that it is something more than the usual), etc.
And of course it's technically true that IRCC doesn't know much about it other than that they're not getting the necessary clearance from the security side. They genuinely (I think) usually don't know if it's a serious issue or some 'paperwork holdup.' Even their people may not (often) have sufficient experience to read between the lines.
Of a different degree are specific notes that may mention what the actual issue is - checks on physical presence or similar, perhaps language - but probably don't indicate sufficintly what the severity of the issue is (eg unless you get an actual letter saying there is an issue with X it may mostly look like it's a routine double-check - which is probably true most of the time).