After 5 Years...Rejected!!!!!

[screech339]

I said "even" if I made mistake by purpose. I am not sure about you, but if one day I want to cheat or lie I would make sure that my counterpart does not have all the information that I have. and it is not easy to find out...

In this case that it is really easy for the other party to figure out my supposedly cheating action, it wouldn't be really smart to cheat or lie ???.... If now you are not accusing me to be a stupid cheater....

You are trying to put words in my mouth.

All I am saying that you admitted to applying early yourself and thus knew you were short on meeting the 1095. You didn't "cheat" at all. You basically rolled the dice and hope that the judge will give you citizenship. You gambled and you lost.

 

[on-hold]

It's part of CIC's process to allow those who do not meet the residency requirement to appear before a judge to argue their case. Unfortunately based on what we've seen here, it's extremely rare that exceptions are granted (even for those who are only a few days short). And there's really no way for CIC to judge if you made the mistake in error or on purpose - so all applications without sufficient days are treated the same.

Agreed that CIC would be better off telling people to just reapply - however the process hasn't been designed this way. It's too bad you didn't find this forum years ago. We would have told you to withdraw your application and reapply.

Anyway - hopefully you qualify to apply now. Good luck.

I do confess, I've never understood this. This man applied two months too early, and his mistake made him wait for five years, which I gather he spent in Canada. To me, part of the point of a judge is that they are considered to have intelligence and discretion. I would personally consider it an exercise of both of these if the judge said (at this point) -- OK, you're 58 days short, but you've been in Canada for the past 5 years. Application approved.

It honestly seems silly to make an applicant apply again, when they've made up the deficit by more than 30 times. If there are reasons to think that they applied early to meet a deadline that they otherwise would not have met (like this last June 10th), or if they applied early and then took off for 2.99 years to live in another country, that's another thing entirely. I can understand extra scrutiny around it, and there probably would be applications that should be rejected. But at the same time, there are some that should be approved. I mean, why would someone want to be a citizenship judge if the better part of the job is approving applicants who have 1090 days, rejecting applicants who have less, and conducting oath ceremonies? That's clerical work.

It's also silly -- if the rejection is automatic -- to delay it by 5 years.

 

[on-hold]

I came to Canada from my home country because ppl wouldn't be respected or heard by the government... I came to Canada because I taught they would treat me based on respect and fairness.... I guess I wasn't thinking straight to some extent...

As for this, don't weep too much for yourself. You made a huge mistake, your file was eaten by a big bureaucracy because of it, and you have to start again. It may be legalistic and silly, but it's anything but unfair.

 

[scylla]

It honestly seems silly to make an applicant apply again, when they've made up the deficit by more than 30 times.

I hear what you're saying - however CIC has this same policy in place for all applications (immigration, citizenship, temporary visa, etc.). You have to qualify for whatever you're applying for when you apply - you can't meet the requirement later. If CIC allowed people to submit applications early - then everyone would just apply early knowing that they would eventually make it through. It would no longer be on an exception basis and I expect this would slow down the overall process for all.

Here's my two cents - which isn't worth much since I'm not in charge. Ideally anyone without sufficient days should be automatically refused with no opportunity to appear in front of a judge - and told to reapply once they qualify. Only those where there is a disagreement between the applicant and CIC regarding whether the residency requirement is met should appear in front of a judge. That's how I would design the process. But again - what I think means nothing...

 

[screech339]

I hear what you're saying - however CIC has this same policy in place for all applications (immigration, citizenship, temporary visa, etc.). You have to qualify for whatever you're applying for when you apply - you can't meet the requirement later. If CIC allowed people to submit applications early - then everyone would just apply early knowing that they would eventually make it through. It would no longer be on an exception basis and I expect this would slow down the overall process for all.

Here's my two cents - which isn't worth much since I'm not in charge. Ideally anyone without sufficient days should be automatically refused with no opportunity to appear in front of a judge - and told to reapply once they qualify. Only those where there is a disagreement between the applicant and CIC regarding whether the residency requirement is met should appear in front of a judge. That's how I would design the process. But again - what I think means nothing...

+1 for you.

That's a more sensible approach to dealing with judges. Use them if there are discrepancies between CIC and applicant over actual physical presence days. The judge can then decide who is correct and move on.

 

[on-hold]

I hear what you're saying - however CIC has this same policy in place for all applications (immigration, citizenship, temporary visa, etc.). You have to qualify for whatever you're applying for when you apply - you can't meet the requirement later. If CIC allowed people to submit applications early - then everyone would just apply early knowing that they would eventually make it through. It would no longer be on an exception basis and I expect this would slow down the overall process for all.

Here's my two cents - which isn't worth much since I'm not in charge. Ideally anyone without sufficient days should be automatically refused with no opportunity to appear in front of a judge - and told to reapply once they qualify. Only those where there is a disagreement between the applicant and CIC regarding whether the residency requirement is met should appear in front of a judge. That's how I would design the process. But again - what I think means nothing...

I agree this would be a problem -- the way to solve it would simply be to have the regular, uncomplicated process be substantially faster than the judicial review. I also understand why CIC does it the way they do, it's one method of avoiding the complications that people manage to bring to everything. But just reject them quickly, for cripes sake!

 

[djoli]

So sorry to hear that. If I were you I would re-apply as new applications are processed so much faster, you would for sure get your citizenship within on year and if you are lucky maybe within 6 to 8 months. With the Judicial review you can almost be certain that it would be rejected again as they rarely overturn the judge's decision.
This is what I have been contemplating, you wait all these years and CIC comes back with a NO decision.
With the new rules in place you are more than qualified and your application will be processed much faster even if you get another RQ.

 

[djoli]

You could not have said it better! It is unbelievable that they would make someone wait 5 years and then tell them they are short of 58 days. Let us remember that we are dealing with a bunch of incompetent and lazy people at CIC and the fact is that they CANNOT FOR SURE KNOW THAT YOU ARE SHORT OF 58 DAYS.
Their system is so screwed up that they can only guess the number of missing days. The CBSA report does not and cannot tell the whole picture so in most cases they rely on their own personal judgement. Why make someone wait 5 years and then come back to deny their application? this is even revolting.
People need to consider filing class action lawsuits against CIC. If they believe someone does not meet the minimum requirement then they have the right to reject the application right away and not make people wait forever to come back with a "NO" decision.
This is disgraceful.

I do confess, I've never understood this. This man applied two months too early, and his mistake made him wait for five years, which I gather he spent in Canada. To me, part of the point of a judge is that they are considered to have intelligence and discretion. I would personally consider it an exercise of both of these if the judge said (at this point) -- OK, you're 58 days short, but you've been in Canada for the past 5 years. Application approved.

It honestly seems silly to make an applicant apply again, when they've made up the deficit by more than 30 times. If there are reasons to think that they applied early to meet a deadline that they otherwise would not have met (like this last June 10th), or if they applied early and then took off for 2.99 years to live in another country, that's another thing entirely. I can understand extra scrutiny around it, and there probably would be applications that should be rejected. But at the same time, there are some that should be approved. I mean, why would someone want to be a citizenship judge if the better part of the job is approving applicants who have 1090 days, rejecting applicants who have less, and conducting oath ceremonies? That's clerical work.

It's also silly -- if the rejection is automatic -- to delay it by 5 years.

 

[screech339]

You could not have said it better! It is unbelievable that they would make someone wait 5 years and then tell them they are short of 58 days. Let us remember that we are dealing with a bunch of incompetent and lazy people at CIC and the fact is that they CANNOT FOR SURE KNOW THAT YOU ARE SHORT OF 58 DAYS.
Their system is so screwed up that they can only guess the number of missing days. The CBSA report does not and cannot tell the whole picture so in most cases they rely on their own personal judgement. Why make someone wait 5 years and then come back to deny their application? this is even revolting.
People need to consider filing class action lawsuits against CIC. If they believe someone does not meet the minimum requirement then they have the right to reject the application right away and not make people wait forever to come back with a "NO" decision.
This is disgraceful.

Yes it is disgraceful for someone to wait 5 years to find out if they were denied due to 1-7 days short of 1095 days, especially those who honestly thought they qualified at the time of applying.

However to apply for citizenship 58 days short? What did you expect? And to say "CANNOT KNOW FOR SURE THAT YOU ARE SHORT OF 58 DAYS", that is a false statement. They can see in the application that the OP applied 58 days short. But due to the old rule, CIC cannot reject it. Any applications, intentional or not, short of 1095, has to be forwarded to the judge to determine the next step.

That process is the part that can take the longest time to reach. A judge has to see each and every individuals that was short of their 1095 days and hear their case. Remember the judge not only have to hear cases like OP but also preside over the citizenship oaths.

In the OP's case and probably almost all those who had to see a judge, after submitting application, 5 years to see the judge to make his case.

The OP rolled the dice in the hope that the judge will grant him/her path to citizenship and he/she lost.

 

[rmust]

Became PR: Oct 2008
Citizenship Application: Nov 2010
4 years period:Nov 2007 - Nov 2010(Partly Student Visa)
Citizenship Test: March 2012 (Scarborough Centre)
Hearing with Aris Babikian: Oct 2014

I made my biggest mistake in my life and sent my citizenship application 58 days earlier, and now after 5 years Judge(Babikian) rejected my case.

During 2007-2010, I went to university in Canada and I was working in one of the canadian bank with all the paychecks available. After hearing, Babikian told me that everything is fine with my case and it is just one missing border stamp in my passport which he would inquire from the border control. He even asked for my police report 2 months ago and then after he received it, he declined my case.

He gave me the option either to apply again or apply for judicial review. I have been in Canada since Dec 2004 and I may have been out of country not more than 4 month during this time. I am so upset with this extreme unfairness of the system and I am asking for help from whoever has knowledge with this matter to help me if I should re-apply or apply for judicial review.


In advance, thanks for your help and respond.

This is an unfortunate case and a waste of 5 years waiting for citizenship. Without knowing the full context of your case it is not possible for any one of us to judge or criticize the outcome of your case....it is just speculations.

My suggestion is that you send in a brand new applications. From what you are saying it sounds like you are eligible to apply under the new rules. Processing time should be 1 year or less provided it is a routine application.

Good luck and hope things work out for you!

 

[zardoz]

By my calculations, you were short of the required physical presence days AND you were trying to claim the full pre-PR period.
I suspect that THIS is the reason that you were ultimately refused. As citizenship judges have no part in new application processing where only actual physical presence is considered, you won't have this problem in the future.

 

[janoo]

Hi.. In my opinion without any further delays you may apply with new rules and

am sure you will be having enough number of days, and missing passport matter

will be not an issue as they count only last 6 years . please check all and

apply cases will be finish in months in future rather than years...

 

[MUFC]

Yes , under the new rules he/she will get the citizenship much faster.

 

[scylla]

By my calculations, you were short of the required physical presence days AND you were trying to claim the full pre-PR period.
I suspect that THIS is the reason that you were ultimately refused. As citizenship judges have no part in new application processing where only actual physical presence is considered, you won't have this problem in the future.

Zardoz - you're absolutely right. The OP was well over 58 days short. Even if he didn't leave from the time he arrived as a student to the time he applied for citizenship - he would still have been at least 150 days short of the 1095 day requirement. Agreed that it looks like he assumed days before becoming a PR could be counted as full days (rather than half).

 

[Ardi77]

Thanks everyones for their concern and responds. I believe my best call would be to apply again and since Oct 2008 that I landed, I have not been out of country more than 3 months. Hopefully, CIC would be convienced this time that I can be a citizen.

I guess because I have been always working in the private section and we are dealing with being effiecient and reaching targets on the daily basis, I m not really familiar with relaxing government work environmet. I am sure it would be more effiecient ways of communication and procedure in order to have everyone a happy citizen.....

The surprising part is that in my hearing, all the judge (Aris Babikian) was asking was about the time after my application and he was trying to find out if I was staying in the country meanwhile I was waiting. As I said, I have all my paychecks and tax forms from one of the 5 biggest canadian bank for these years and he seemed to be happy at the end..... but again it is now just 5 years waste of time and efforts.... who cares

Thanks everyone for your kind respond,