Applying with Basic Residence. Where to find recent success stories?

[bystander]

I am exactly in the same boat as yours, and I was thinking of doing the same thing. I think if we apply with basic residency, most probably we'll get the RQ (which who cares, fill it out and send it), takes let's say 2 years, they reject it, al right, we apply again under normal law. It will take 1.5 year anyway if you apply even with minimum physical presence, right? If the judge rejects the application, I won't go for appeal nor a lawyer, I will simply apply again, what do you say? sounds like a plan?

With our beloved Bill C-24 now a law, and residency requirement coming into force in June-July 2015 as reported by members here, I did my calculation. As expected, I will have basic residence early 2015 but no physical until august. I have pre-PR and a lot of short absences for vacations, longest one 20 days. A couple of questions for senior members:

1) When applying with only basic residence, does it make any difference if I send the application with 1096 days of basic residence or more, or it's just lottery either way?

2) How can I find CJ cases from recent years for applicants with basic residence? I want to know if the trend is towards worse odds, better odds, or same odds. I want to see if C24 defining residency as "physical" will affect the CJ outcome, hence I need a place to look at CJ cases as they come.

I know a lot of people on this forum are strongly against applying with basic residence, but from my point of view it's just a lottery. WIth C-24 I will have to wait 3 more years before I qualify. If I get a positive result from CJ - good, if I get negative (after appeal) OK, I can wait, if I don't get any in 3 years (unlikely?) I can withdraw and reapply, no big deal.

 

[bystander]

And if you check this document, cic.gc.ca/english/resources/manuals/cp/cp05-eng.pdf the section which talks about exceptions, all my absences and most probably yours, falls into these categories. and these are court orders, citizenship judges will respect it (?).

 

[keesio]

I am exactly in the same boat as yours, and I was thinking of doing the same thing. I think if we apply with basic residency, most probably we'll get the RQ (which who cares, fill it out and send it), takes let's say 2 years, they reject it, al right, we apply again under normal law. It will take 1.5 year anyway if you apply even with minimum physical presence, right? If the judge rejects the application, I won't go for appeal nor a lawyer, I will simply apply again, what do you say? sounds like a plan?

As others have mentioned, if you apply and get rejected, the second time you apply you are more likely to get an RQ even when you apply with the correct number of days in the new rule. This is worse than simply waiting to apply under the new rule the first time.

 

[on-hold]

All there is to lose is the application fee. Meeting physical residence obligations will take me 3 more years after basic. If I still haven't seen the judge in 3 years then I can withdraw the application and submit under the new rules.

I don't understand, if you will meet physical residence obligations in August of 2015, it would take you three more years after basic residence? That seems to imply that you haven't been in Canada at all -- but that's not possible, if you would meet the physical residence obligation in August of next year. Is your case being complicated by the the 6 months out of every calendar year clause? That is one bit of C-24 tripe that hasn't been bashed around enough . . .

 

[bystander]

The waiting time will be extended from one year from now to 3 years from now since pre-PR time is not credited. It will be extra 2 years from next august (if you stay the whole 2 years in Canada, of course).

I don't understand, if you will meet physical residence obligations in August of 2015, it would take you three more years after basic residence? That seems to imply that you haven't been in Canada at all -- but that's not possible, if you would meet the physical residence obligation in August of next year. Is your case being complicated by the the 6 months out of every calendar year clause? That is one bit of C-24 tripe that hasn't been bashed around enough . . .

 

[bystander]

Reading more on the court files, it seems to me that it really depends on the CJ and which tests they choose to apply. However, what would one lose if applies with basic residency and gets rejected (besides the fees and getting RQ for the next round of citizenship application --which most Iranians are getting it anyway)?

 

[on-hold]

Reading more on the court files, it seems to me that it really depends on the CJ and which tests they choose to apply. However, what would one lose if applies with basic residency and gets rejected (besides the fees and getting RQ for the next round of citizenship application --which most Iranians are getting it anyway)?

If you believe this is true, then there should be recent examples of people getting citizenship with basic residency, but not 1095 days. Do you have any examples?

 

[bystander]

The ones that go to courts are of course the unsuccessful ones. The successful ones should be either found on forums or by asking people. Does anyone know any successful case?

I know one successful old case (2008), but the lesson from the PR application says, never rely on exceptions

If you believe this is true, then there should be recent examples of people getting citizenship with basic residency, but not 1095 days. Do you have any examples?

 

[eileenf]

However, what would one lose if applies with basic residency and gets rejected

A whole lot of time, lawyers fees and anxiety.

Just to be clear, "basic residency" is not a thing. I don't know why CIC lists it on the residence calculator. It is not a legal concept of residence in Canada. The CIC will absolutely not approve based on "basic residency". A judge might approve an applicant short of physical presence based on the Koo test or the Papadogiorgakis test. But "basic residency" is irrelevant to either of these tests.

 

[bystander]

Yep! and that's ``if'' the judge decides to use any of those tests. The cases that I read, the CJ had decided NOT to use the Koo test and rejected the application based on the lack of physical presence. So, it is a gamble. If you don't appeal the judge's verdict, there will be no lawyer's fee. But, it is a very hard decision to make.

A whole lot of time, lawyers fees and anxiety.

Just to be clear, "basic residency" is not a thing. I don't know why CIC lists it on the residence calculator. It is not a legal concept of residence in Canada. The CIC will absolutely not approve based on "basic residency". A judge might approve an applicant short of physical presence based on the Koo test or the Papadogiorgakis test. But "basic residency" is irrelevant to either of these tests.

 

[keesio]

Yep! and that's ``if'' the judge decides to use any of those tests. The cases that I read, the CJ had decided NOT to use the Koo test and rejected the application based on the lack of physical presence. So, it is a gamble. If you don't appeal the judge's verdict, there will be no lawyer's fee. But, it is a very hard decision to make.

Why take a gamble that has a .01% chance of success but had a moderately high chance of causing a delay your second application?

 

[eileenf]

So, it is a gamble. If you don't appeal the judge's verdict, there will be no lawyer's fee.

Yes it's a gamble, and while one doesn't have to have a lawyer for a citizenship judge hearing, it's absolutely advisable, especially if you're trying to do something relatively unusual like get approved with a deficit of physical presence on the hope of the Koo test.