If you have not seen definitive answers to your specific questions, you have not read all that much at this forum.
*Do they mail to the mailing address or residential address?
Definitive answer: IRCC will mail notices to the mailing address.
*Should i notify the change of address when/if it happens to CIC?
As opposed to what? Making a misrepresentation by omission?
Definitive answer: Of course the applicant should notify IRCC (there is no CIC anymore) of any change in residential address.
And notify IRCC of any other material changes in the information provided in the application, as the applicant must verify he or she will do in signing the application. (Actually most of the information in application is historical, not subject to change, so change of residential address is actually one of the few items of information covered by the applicant's affirmation to notify IRCC of changes.)
But of course a residential address abroad risks inviting the sort of elevated scrutiny, questions, non-routine processing an applicant wants to avoid. So many applicants do not like the definitive answer. And historically many gave CIC, and will continue to give IRCC, an address which is not where they actually continue to reside. And many, maybe most, do not encounter a problem because of this.
But the definitive answer is clear: of course the applicant should notify IRCC of any change in residential address.
How do I explain to the interviewer?
It is not likely an interviewer will solicit an
explanation. The interviewer will ask questions, most calling for a factual answer. Some questions may ask why.
If your question is about how do you respond to the interviewer's questions, the definitive answer is simple: answer honestly, as accurately as possible, sticking to facts as much as possible. The actual facts of course.
Get creative at your peril.
Will the officer close my case?
If you acknowledge working and living abroad?
Definitive answer: Living abroad while the application is pending is not a ground for denying, or closing, the application.
For this question the non-definitive answer is the more important one. And it is indeed discussed at some length in multiple topics here: applicants working or living abroad while the application is pending tend to be at higher risk for elevated scrutiny, non-routine processing, supplemental requests for information and documentation including RQ (CIT 0171 which requires the applicant to submit detailed documentation about where he has been living, working, banking, doctor's visits, community activities, location and activity of immediate family, and more). Not all applicants abroad encounter this. Many do. Historically the processing times have been much longer for this type of applicant, long enough that some encounter difficulty complying with the PR Residency Obligation, which the applicant must do right up to the day of taking the oath.
Additionally, as referenced by
Scylla, such applicants tend to risk logistical problems like getting notice of scheduled events, such as the interview and test, subsequent interview or hearing with a Citizenship Officer, too late to appear at the time scheduled.
*Do the interview and the test happen in the same day?
Typically, yes. But there can be follow-up interviews.
Regarding response to Asker302 and fulfilling the requirements as of date of applying:
DodaP said:
I, however, disagree with your assessment of the situation. I am applying now while fulfilling all the requirements, including intent to reside (since the decision to work elsewhere is not firm and it hasn't happen yet).
The applicant must be fully qualified for the grant of citizenship as of the day prior to signing the application, and verify this in the application.
But remember, the applicant must CONTINUE to meet the qualifications right up to the moment of taking the oath.
Currently indications are that IRCC is not requiring applicants to verify the intent to continue to reside other than doing so in the application itself. And if Bill C-6 is adopted, as proposed, it will not only remove the intent to reside requirement, it will retroactively make it as if there never was such a requirement.
But let us be clear: while it is easy enough to say "
I changed my mind" anytime, what is obvious is, well, obvious. Given the current government's approach to the intent requirement, it is not likely the technicalities of it will be enforced. Thus, for example, since it requires the applicant to intend to
continue to reside in Canada, and this requirement must be met from the date the application is signed to the date the oath is taken,
technically residing abroad after applying, on its face, would show the absence of this intent -- a person cannot intend to
continue to do something unless he is currently doing it (and intends to continue to do so), so an applicant not residing in Canada cannot intend to continue residing in Canada.
That is most likely precisely how the Conservative government intended to apply the intent requirement when they amended the Citizenship Act to add it. Indeed, it was clear this requirement was in large part aimed at applicants who leave Canada while the application is pending, referred to by many, including a Federal Court justice in an official decision, as
applicants-applying-on-the-way-to-the-airport. The requirement was probably intended to provide a simple ground for denying these applicants.
While the current government has indicated backing off this a lot, it is worth recalling that it was under Liberal leadership that indications of extended absences while the application is pending was first formally identified as a
reason-to-question-residency . . . back in an Operational Bulletin issued in 2005 (now expired, but as noted, the Conservatives replaced it with more strict screening criteria and pushed this issue much farther and harder).
But even all that might not be the important point: credibility may be the important point.
Say you affirm you intend to
continue to reside in Canada in the application, mail off the application, and even before you become a citizen take a job abroad. Those who fail to see how his looks, what impression it can make, tend to be those who 18 months later, bogged down in a
physical presence case, unhappy that things are not going well, come back to the forum and ask
Whaaa happened? and insist there is no conceivable reason why IRCC is handling their case as non-routine.
The potential effects of moving abroad and not informing IRCC of the move also include damaging an applicant's credibility. And, at least in the past, CIC would sometimes telephone the applicant's home number. They did me, on a Saturday, just a few days before my interview, to give me notice of the interview. I took the call. I attended the interview. I took the oath two days after interview (literally, slightly less than 48 hours after the interview). If I was not really living there, things would have gone differently. And if IRCC finds out the applicant is not really living at the residential address provided, there is that huge
CREDIBILITY factor again. To be clear, second only to being actually qualified for citizenship, the next most important factor is the applicant's credibility. Once an applicant's credibility is damaged, the process gets a lot, lot tougher.
This last observation warrants emphasis, and repeating: second only to being actually qualified for citizenship, the next most important factor is the applicant's credibility. Once an applicant's credibility is damaged, the process gets a lot, lot tougher.
Overall, the definitive answers to your questions are easy. But those are not the important answers.
Let us know how things go.
DodaP said:
Hi all, i have been living for 4 years and change, working and paying taxes in Canada.
i have been offered a job in a different country in a couple of months.
I missed my first chance to apply for citizenship last february due to pure laziness and only in May i was able to apply after the 2015 C-24 took effect.
I am however nervous to apply now that I have this possibility (better job, better pay).
I have a few questions:
*If you add a mailing address different than your residence, will the test notification and oath notification be sent to the mailing address or the residential address?
*should i notify the change of address when/if it happens to CIC? How do I explain to the interviewer? Will the officer close my case?
*Do the interview and the test happen in the same day?
It makes me very nervous to loose my both my chance at citizenship and PR (isince it is up for review next year).
Any feedback on the above questions?
I have all required paperwork ready to submit and all requirements check.
PS: I have been combing through all the threads and I couldn’t quite find a definitive answer to my questions.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
I, however, disagree with your assessment of the situation. I am applying now while fulfilling all the requirements, including intent to reside (since the decision to work elsewhere is not firm and it hasn't happen yet).
I am asking the question in preparation of what could happen. Hence my actual questions:
*Do they mail to the mailing address or residential address?
*Should i notify the change of address when/if it happens to CIC? How do I explain to the interviewer? Will the officer close my case?
*Do the interview and the test happen in the same day?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Following what I have been reading and hearing, this whole intent to reside requirement is a grey area, and CIC doesn't help with their public answer to that very same question.
