Applications like this are waste of taxpayer money... irresponsible... going through the process twice as one cannot wait an extra month just to be sure... then calling your MP because you made a mistake... wow... really sad.
Citizenship denial because of a mistake in my effective presence calculation
- Thread starter chardenne
- Start date
Wow! that is harsh Panda. Its not OPs intention to waste taxpayer's money. He/She wants to become a citizen and was probably really excited. If He/She knew this is going to be wasting his time, money and taxpayers money for sure would not have applied. No one here wants to go through the entire process once let alone twice.Panda_Bear said:
Again this forum is to provide help for people with such problems. I have done my share of mistakes and forum without any judgement has helped me. So do not judge as you do not know what OPs intention to apply for citizenship.
All the best OP. All the best Panda
Oh wow. You think I don't kick myself enough already to judge me here? Last time I checked, a forum is supposed to help people. I know I made a big mistake by not waiting because I circled the date in my calendar like 1 year ago. I know several people who are in the same position right now. How is that wrong to be willing to be Canadian really badly?Panda_Bear said:
It is good for you that they don't test your kindness and humanity level at the citizenship test... really sad.
first of all i agree that it was a mistake. but, we are all human and mistakes do happen.
secondly criticism if it's not constructive is useless.
moreover since the hike in the citizenship fees last year nowadays taxpayer money is not used at all to subsidize CIC as the fees cover 100% of the processing expenses. THat's the whole reason they hiked the fees in the first place.
cheers.
secondly criticism if it's not constructive is useless.
moreover since the hike in the citizenship fees last year nowadays taxpayer money is not used at all to subsidize CIC as the fees cover 100% of the processing expenses. THat's the whole reason they hiked the fees in the first place.
cheers.
Welcome Chardenne. Haters will hate. Don't be disillusioned by the denial. Apply again with enough days as buffer. Two things that may affect you are Fees and test. Test you can prepare in a week and nowadays the processing times are not as bad as it used to be. I cannot comment on the fees as I don't know your financial situation.chardenne said:
I applied with 1096 days. I got RQ and got my citizenship after 14 months from the time I applied. I know people in this forum who have waited 4 years to get it got denied. So denial is not the worst thing.
I know a case where Judge approved the case after interview even though the applicant had less no of physical presence days and then CIC rejected Judge's approval citing that the applicant was ineligible to even apply.
One suggestion is do not think about the process/time after applying. The more you think slower the process seems. It exactly happened in my case. I was constantly following the ecas, forum, my peers and a tracking spreadsheet. I got dejected and my colleague advised me to forget about for a month. Made me promise not visit this forum or ecas for the entire month. Exactly after 1 week I got my Pink letter. I was surprised and thanked my colleague.
Citizenship helps you in a lot of ways but PR is not half bad. So all the best.
chikloo said:
Thanks a lot for your words, it really warms my heart. I applied at 1 097 days, I would never have thought that I would "forget" 14 days outside of the country. The weird thing is that I kept track of all my absences on paper, because the online calculator was having lots of issues at some point, so I am questioning its efficiency and wondering if by mistake it didn't record what I was doing one day. Anyway, I will never know, and I can't prove this, because it was still my responsibility to check the dates after printing out the calculator. I just got too excited, and now that's what it is. I have a friend who i taking the exam soon, and he realized he forgot to include 1 week across the US border, so he is 1 day short... I am not the only one.
I withdrew my application this week. The deadlines in my case were super fast (exactly 2 months after filing the application I took the test), so I will wait until they confirm the file cancellation and reapply.
All the best! :-*
chardenne said:
I assume the older post is more accurate, as to declaring days present in Canada, than today's post (1467 rather than 1097).chardenne said:
Going on that number as of last September, in consideration that you said you have been in Canada since 6 years ago, in further consideration of extended absences within the last four years (2013 to 2015), it would be a good idea to have a substantial, comfortable margin over 1460 days present within the six years preceding the date you make the application.
Thus I concur with this observation by chikloo:
Indeed, I emphatically concur in having a buffer.chikloo said:
It is difficult to predict whether your second application will be subject to elevated scrutiny or not. It can go either way. It obviously depends on many factors. Many of the relevant factors are effectively past tense and cannot be changed (for example: some degree of compromised credibility for failing to be an accurate reporter resulting in a failed application), but other factors can change. For example, waiting until you have a substantial margin or "buffer" before you make a second application is an important factor you can control.
Generally, the default so to say, is that second applications are automatically subject to a higher level of scrutiny, obviously based on the fact that the applicant has applied before when the PR was either not qualified or not settled enough in Canada to follow-through with the process. As noted, you applied when you were not qualified and you failed to accurately declare all absences.
An innocent explanation for an isolated instance helps but credibility is as much about the extent to which someone can be relied upon to accurately report facts, and any failure to be accurate, however innocent, can lead IRCC to question or even doubt that individual's accounting of facts. There is no reason to be much alarmed about this, a single mistake is very common and in itself, if an isolated instance, does not lead to a conclusion the individual lacks credibility. That noted, a lot depends on many other circumstances and factors and the degree to which the whole case otherwise tends to affirm your reported facts, or raises questions and concerns, hopefully far more of the former, affirming your reported facts, than the latter.
As to the impact of an application being abandoned, withdrawn, or denied, note, for example, to the extent we have had access to criteria employed by CIC (now IRCC) in deciding who to issue RQ (CIT 0171, the full blown Residence Questionnaire), one of the known criteria has been the fact of a previous withdrawn, abandoned, or denied application. For a long time, a withdrawn, abandoned, or denied application could be a reason for questioning residency, then for awhile it was a more or less automatic trigger for RQ (in 2012), and since then it is almost certain this is still a potential reason why RQ might be issued, but we also have seen credible reports indicating that many times a second application can be processed routinely. It can go either way. Depending.
In particular, there have been several credible reports from individuals who similarly made a minor error in calculating and declaring their absences, who fell short of the requirements by a small margin, who in the meantime had mostly stayed in Canada and thus had a much stronger case and a substantial margin when making their second application, who then sailed smoothly through the process, perhaps even more quickly than typical, and became citizens in short order.
Overall:
Make a concerted effort to really get things right in the next application. Best to have a good margin, a month or three perhaps, before making the application. And gather your records to be prepared for having to prove not just travel dates but actual presence in-between travel dates, just in case you do get RQ. I am not saying you will get RQ. Again, it really is difficult to predict this. I am saying it would be prudent to be prepared for having to prove where you were living, where you were working, and what else you were doing IN Canada between dates of entry and next exit.
For routine applicants, and your second application may be a routine application, IRCC basically infers the applicant was present in Canada between a last reported entry date and next reported exit date. (This is how the online presence calculator works, counting days between entry and next exit as days in Canada.)
If in contrast IRCC questions the applicant's account of presence in Canada, the applicant has the burden of proving actual presence between those dates. There is a risk, given the withdrawn application (which was your only practical recourse given the error made), IRCC will question your account of presence in Canada, so it would be prudent to be prepared for this, to be prepared to prove your actual presence, where you lived and your activities (establishing work history for example) in Canada.
Unless you are referring to a case more than fifteen or more years ago, something is missing. CIC did NOT have authority to "reject" a Citizenship Judge's approval. And this is still true for IRCC.chikloo said:
For applications processed under procedural changes made by Bill C-24 (basically any applications which had not reached the test/interview step as of August 2014), CIC/IRCC has authority to reject or deny applications WITHOUT referring the case to a CJ unless the grounds for denying citizenship are based on residency or physical presence.
For cases referred to a Citizenship Judge, if CIC/IRCC disagreed with the CJ's approval, CIC/IRCC must nonetheless grant citizenship unless CIC/IRCC timely makes and ultimately wins an appeal. That is, CIC could not override a CJ's decision. It could challenge the decision in Federal Court, and if CIC won the appeal then in all but a very few cases the application would be sent back for reconsideration by another decision-maker.
Apart from the procedure, for applications made prior to June 11, 2015, CJ's had discretion to choose what test to apply for determining whether the applicant met the residency requirement, and falling short of 1095 days actual presence did not necessarily result in being denied citizenship. Indeed, many, many applicants fell short but were still granted citizenship.
That is NOT possible under the requirements for applications made since June 11, 2015. The current law imposes an actual-physical-presence requirement. Falling one day short means the application MUST be denied.
In contrast, under the older law, which was a residency requirement, more than a few successful applicants fell short by hundreds of days . . . even though, at the same time CJs had discretion to apply a strict presence test and deny applicants who were just one day short. And that happened. Some applicants who were short by way over a hundred days were granted citizenship. And some who were short by a few days were denied. That sort of disparate outcome is no longer possible, the minimum amount of presence is now a fixed requirement applicable in all grant citizenship cases.
First of all, hope you are fine now.
Second, that's why people shouldn't apply right after they meet the minimum requirement. Mistakes happen all the time... Under my presence calculation, I can apply one week ago, but I'm gonna wait for another month just in case.
Second, that's why people shouldn't apply right after they meet the minimum requirement. Mistakes happen all the time... Under my presence calculation, I can apply one week ago, but I'm gonna wait for another month just in case.
This. So much this. The calculator didn't save my last addition and I didn't catch it. I mailed my application earlier today. Found the mistake when I filed the duplicate copies I made when I got home. No way to stop it as far as I know. Is there a way to request it to be returned? Because if they process it, they'll likely reject it and I'll be out the fees.jordan1992 said:
Iay
Champion Member
- Feb 4, 2013
- 48
- Job Offer........
- Pre-Assessed..
- App. Filed.......
- Feb 2, 2017
- AOR Received.
- 2017/02/10 In-process 2017/02/16 Test 2017/03/22 DM 2017/03/23
Once you get your AOR and File number via mail or email, I think you can call them right away so you can correct the mistake.Brad Smith said:
Good that you caught it before they process your application.