Curious to see who applied the second time and didn't get an RQ
- Thread starter QAI
- Start date
I think that would be like winning the lottery---I would think that any applicant who has previously withdrawn an application due to RQ should be 10o% sure they will get an RQQAI said:
share your past and present timeline please....
QAI said:Like the subject says, Im curious to know who is in a situation where they applied first got an RQ and withdrew their application and reapplied without getting an RQ. This is for those folks who have the 1095 physical days of presence.
I haven't applied again yet. These are my timelines nonetheless;Simkr said:
We received your application for Canadian citizenship (grant of citizenship) on August 27, 2012.
We sent you a letter acknowledging receipt of your application(s), and a study book called Discover Canada on August 27, 2012. Please consider delays in mail delivery before contacting us.
We started processing your application on February 6, 2013.
Not enough time has passed for there to be many or any people with the experience you're asking for.QAI said:
OB407, which created the pretest RQ and the expansive new RQ trigger list, dates from May 7, 2012. Given current processing times, and the fact that applicants can only know that they've avoided the RQ for sure when they finish reciting the Oath of citizenship, someone who received an RQ in May or June of 2012 and decided to withdraw and reapply (despite having no problems with physical presence) wouldn't have cleared their oath yet on their new application, even in the unlikely event that it was deemed "routine" this time (25 months from June 2012 is July 2014).
Personally, I think it's a super long shot to avoid the RQ in a next go-round. I would suggest keeping with your current application and watching Akella's posts especially for RQ-related ATIP releases. If you see a document that shows that 1. your original RQ trigger has been revised (or is no longer relevant because of the passing time) and 2. the "previous applications withdrawn, denied or abandoned" trigger has been revised, then it'd be a good bet to reapply.
As is, you risk stepping out of one long queue to go to the back of a longer queue.
good post!
Interesting, I didn't knew that ATIP would point out RQ trigger or even knew that RQ was time sensitive and becomes irrelevant after certain time.
I think im going to hang on to my first application, i have already ordered ATIP notes and once i get them, I shall post them here for Akella's viewing.
Interesting, I didn't knew that ATIP would point out RQ trigger or even knew that RQ was time sensitive and becomes irrelevant after certain time.
I think im going to hang on to my first application, i have already ordered ATIP notes and once i get them, I shall post them here for Akella's viewing.
This is the list of RQ triggers residencequestionnaire.wordpress.com/rq-risk-indicators/ that was released via ATIP last year. It was revised in November 2012 (for instance C1 no longer seems to be a trigger). We do not have the updated list, but the document at the top of this page (and discussed within) contains references to the updated RQ triggers and trigger interpretation. http://residencequestionnaire.wordpress.com/atip-releases/QAI said:
Your personal ATIP (sometimes referred to as GCMS notes) may or may not list the RQ trigger. Probably not.
Some triggers have been reassessed, such as "C1-ID (provided in support of application) has been issued within 3 months of date of application" but there is no guarantee that any or all RQ triggers will become irrelevant after a certain time. What I meant to say is that, IF you had a trigger at the beginning of your qualifying period (such as A5 you were unemployed for first 6 months and later traveled out of Canada) AND reapplying 6 months later would remove that 6 months from your qualifying period AND we found out that previous withdrawn applications (A3) were no longer an RQ trigger, THEN maybe you should consider reapplying. Even the necessity of that is uncertain though, this thread https://secure.immigration.ca/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=14503&PN=1&title=new-information-in-gcms-report-thoughts shows that the CIC reassessed the applicant's file to see if the revised RQ triggers still applied.QAI said:
Akella posts mostly on the other forum https://secure.immigration.ca/forum/forum_topics.asp?FID=3&title=canadian-citizenship and focusses more on general ATIPs related to the citizenship process and RQs, rather than personal ATIP files. Personal ATIPs rarly contain system-wide RQ documents or policies and personally, I would recommend not posting personal ATIP files in full due to privacy issues.QAI said:
Good luck (to you, me, and all of us!)
Eeleenf, do you what NCB (non-computer based entry) mean? The reason I am asking is because when I landed in Montreal, I got a hand written landing paper from the borders. But my wife on the other hand landed in Vancouver and she got a computer based landing report (which I prefer of course, the writing on my weak landing paper is fading...)
I also got handwritten landing papers. And yes. Totally fading. Not sure if entries were ever visible.farrous13 said:
I'm pretty sure NCB refers to notes written on a received physical files (like a citizenship application). I have the impression that they typically refer to security concerns, but I may be wrong. It seems this was only used for the FOSS computer system, which is mostly outdated now as it has been replaced by GCMS.
"A2 – NCB in FOSS, Warning or Note(s) in GCMS indicating a concern."
A5:
Homemakers, retirees, students are not considered unemployed (4,9, 18). You better write “homemaker” in the app if you are a homemaker (14).
Explanation of consultant/self-employed with travel situation (5,8-9) – they went with a “strict” scenario – any period of unemployment within 4 years + any travel, even if it does not coincide with unemployment.
I think A5 is what gave me the RQ. I was unemployed from Jan 2010 to April 2010 and then I travelled from April 2010 to June 2010 outside of Canada. I could wait till as along as going back 4 years would skip my travel/unemployed timelines. if that makes sense but still a very long shot. so basically if i reapplied in August 2014, going back 4 years would mean providing all activities/addresses upto August 2010 which would skip my unemployment + travel period.
Homemakers, retirees, students are not considered unemployed (4,9, 18). You better write “homemaker” in the app if you are a homemaker (14).
Explanation of consultant/self-employed with travel situation (5,8-9) – they went with a “strict” scenario – any period of unemployment within 4 years + any travel, even if it does not coincide with unemployment.
I think A5 is what gave me the RQ. I was unemployed from Jan 2010 to April 2010 and then I travelled from April 2010 to June 2010 outside of Canada. I could wait till as along as going back 4 years would skip my travel/unemployed timelines. if that makes sense but still a very long shot. so basically if i reapplied in August 2014, going back 4 years would mean providing all activities/addresses upto August 2010 which would skip my unemployment + travel period.
eileenf said:
It's up to the applicant to self-define themselves as a homemaker. If they leave the profession/employment section blank, they'll probably trigger RQ (a5). But if they list "homemaker" during that period, they may avoid it.farrous13 said:
I also want to clarify that QAI's above quote: "A5:Homemakers, retirees, students are not considered unemployed (4,9, 18). You better write “homemaker” in the app if you are a homemaker (14).
Explanation of consultant/self-employed with travel situation (5,8-9) – they went with a “strict” scenario – any period of unemployment within 4 years + any travel, even if it does not coincide with unemployment." is a summary by Akella of an ATIP release and can be viewed here in full: http://residencequestionnaire.wordpress.com/atip-releases/
if your application is a family application does it make sense to identify your self as homemaker( during 7 months of unemployment period immediate after immigrating to canada ) although your wife in her application she identify her self as homemaker as well.eileenf said: