Applied with short days and got Citizenship

[FutureCanadian]

Any one with short days and applied and finally got Citizenship, please share experience.... Thanks

 

[alahoy]

No reply yet. Is this possible? I guess not.

 

[dpenabill]

Any one with short days and applied and finally got Citizenship, please share experience.... Thanks

There is no possibility of success for any shortfall application made after June 11, 2015.


Regarding shortfall applications made prior to June 11, 2015:

There are other topics here which include reports from some who applied with a shortfall and became citizens. And some who were denied.

In those other topics I have cited and linked numerous actual cases, as reflected in official Federal Court decisions, in which the applicant was short of 1095 days actual presence and became a citizen, and others in which a Citizenship Judge approved the applicant but the Federal Court overturned that. There are, as well, many such cases in which the CJ denied approval for a shortfall applicant and the Federal Court upheld that.

However, the specific facts and circumstances of each of these cases varies considerably. There is no general rule other than that shortfall cases are at risk of being denied just because of the shortfall.

 

[farid-]

Never heard off as mostly to be on safe side apply month or so later better to apply little late as compare to waiting n putting oneself in trouble. but see if someone reply.

 

[FutureCanadian]

Thanks for the reply; what if the shortage is because of an error in calculation and if shortage is just 2 to 3 days from 1095 days (applied prior to Jun 11, 2015).

 

[dpenabill]

Thanks for the reply; what if the shortage is because of an error in calculation and if shortage is just 2 to 3 days from 1095 days (applied prior to Jun 11, 2015).

There is still no general rule which will reliably predict the outcome.

As noted, there are numerous reports of successful shortfall applications, with shortfalls ranging from a few days to more than a hundred (there are isolated instances of even far larger shortfall cases being successful, but they are highly unusual, almost certainly an anomaly based on unique circumstances). But there are also more than a few examples of even a small shortfall constituting grounds to deny citizenship.

Thus, all the other facts and circumstances involved are likely to have a big influence on the ultimate outcome. The variables are so many it would be more misleading than helpful to attempt enumerating some.

That said, some factors obviously have more significance than others. Including a very small shortfall generally being a lot better than a big shortfall.

The nature of the "error" can be a big factor. In this regard, some errors are more or less minor or innocent on their face, while others more or less indicate the unreliability of the reporter (the latter ranging from someone just not being a very accurate reporter, prone to making mistakes, to someone being evasive or even deliberately giving erroneous information).

The size of the mistake itself can be a big factor. There has been a participant here who reported making an error reducing physical presence to just a week or so less than 1095, but the actual discrepancy itself was more than a month. That size of discrepancy hurts, even if it only results in a recalculation to just below the threshold. Remember, any discrepancy hurts and can be a problem, even if recalculating due to the mistake does not reduce physical presence to less than 1095.

Whether some of the credit for time in Canada derives from prior to landing can be a big factor.

The overall indications of having settled in and living in Canada can be a factor.

Among many others.

There is no fixed formula for weighing the strength of any given case.

There is no harm in staying with the application and following the process through. Just be sure to be as accurate as possible. Correct any mistakes made and make as few mistakes as possible going forward. Cooperate with IRCC and submit proof as requested. If the mistake was fairly small and you otherwise have a strong case, the odds are probably quite good you will be granted citizenship.

 

[FutureCanadian]

Dpenabill: Many thanks for a quick and detailed reply. If it is spouse in whose case a mistake happened in days calculation (just 3 days) whereas husband has over 1095 days while both have strong case. Can case splitting happen in such situations ? Or waiting is a better option, still less than 12 months from applying.... Thanks

 

[Canadiandesi2006]

Dpenabill: Many thanks for a quick and detailed reply. If it is spouse in whose case a mistake happened in days calculation (just 3 days) whereas husband has over 1095 days while both have strong case. Can case splitting happen in such situations ? Or waiting is a better option, still less than 12 months from applying.... Thanks

Yes, splitting of applications is possible. Its very difficult to say if CIC may consider such cases, it did not show much generosity in such cases though there could be few rare exceptions. I know its tough but many candidates have hard luck in such cases.

You might consider requesting the ATIP reports for both and decide the next course of action.

 

[dpenabill]

Thanks for the reply; what if the shortage is because of an error in calculation and if shortage is just 2 to 3 days from 1095 days (applied prior to Jun 11, 2015).

There is still no general rule which will reliably predict the outcome.

As noted, there are numerous reports of successful shortfall applications, with shortfalls ranging from a few days to more than a hundred (there are isolated instances of even far larger shortfall cases being successful, but they are highly unusual, almost certainly an anomaly based on unique circumstances). But there are also more than a few examples of even a small shortfall constituting grounds to deny citizenship.

Thus, all the other facts and circumstances involved are likely to have a big influence on the ultimate outcome. The variables are so many it would be more misleading than helpful to attempt enumerating some.

That said, some factors obviously have more significance than others. Including a very small shortfall generally being a lot better than a big shortfall.

The nature of the "error" can be a big factor. In this regard, some errors are more or less minor or innocent on their face, while others more or less indicate the unreliability of the reporter (the latter ranging from someone just not being a very accurate reporter, prone to making mistakes, to someone being evasive or even deliberately giving erroneous information).

The size of the mistake itself can be a big factor. There has been a participant here who reported making an error reducing physical presence to just a week or so less than 1095, but the actual discrepancy itself was more than a month. That size of discrepancy hurts, even if it only results in a recalculation to just below the threshold. Remember, any discrepancy hurts and can be a problem, even if recalculating due to the mistake does not reduce physical presence to less than 1095.

Whether some of the credit for time in Canada derives from prior to landing can be a big factor.

The overall indications of having settled in and living in Canada can be a factor.

Among many others.

There is no fixed formula for weighing the strength of any given case.

While splitting family applications is allowed sometimes, the last internal information from CIC (thus somewhat dated) generally discouraged splitting RQ'd applicants. Not surprisingly, the small number of anecdotal reports reflected mixed results, splitting sometimes allowed, many times not. There is an ironic report in another forum by an applicant who pushed CIC to split their applications, they were split, and then the one which had received the RQ was the one which actually proceeded to the oath sooner.

I am no expert and not qualified to give personal advice, but I see no harm in staying with the application and following the process through. Just be sure to be as accurate as possible. Correct any mistakes made and make as few mistakes as possible going forward. Cooperate with IRCC and submit proof as requested. If the mistake was fairly small and you otherwise have strong cases, the odds are probably quite good both of you will be granted citizenship.

But how you approach this is a personal decision you make based on your best judgment considering all the facts and circumstances of your situation. Consulting with a lawyer only costs money, so that is always an option.

While the timeline for processing appears to continue be slow for many, my sense is that things really will begin to open up and get resolved more quickly than they have in the recent past. But I have been wrong before (in the early stages I way underestimated the disastrous impact that OB 407 would have on timelines for scores of applicants for whom there was no substantive reason to question or doubt their qualifications).