Did failing to include flagpole affect your citizenship application

[Klamm]

Hi everyone,

I just submitted my citizenship application, and now I realize I should've probably logged in the "flagpoling" trip to the US border (to land as a PR) in my physical presence calculator. I know a few minutes at the border does not count as a day, but I am hearing some people have gotten requests for information because of this omission.

Can please those who have actually submitted their applications without including their flagpole trip (if they had one) share their experiences on how this might have affected their cases?

I am concerned about this and want to know if there is anything one can do at this point.

Thank you all so much!

 

[dpenabill]

Hi everyone,

I just submitted my citizenship application, and now I realize I should've probably logged in the "flagpoling" trip to the US border (to land as a PR) in my physical presence calculator. I know a few minutes at the border does not count as a day, but I am hearing some people have gotten requests for information because of this omission.

Can please those who have actually submitted their applications without including their flagpole trip (if they had one) share their experiences on how this might have affected their cases?

I am concerned about this and want to know if there is anything one can do at this point.

Thank you all so much!

Short answer: NO problem.

My usual way of answering:

There is near zero chance this will raise an eyebrow let alone be a concern, let alone lead to questions. But if it did lead to a question, that question is readily answered without asking you about it in the interview, let alone needing to request additional information or documentation. But of course if asked about it in the interview, you can readily respond you overlooked that at the time, which should go without being said, but saying it should close the book on it.

Not all inconsistencies in fact or detail are created equal. This omission has ZERO implication of misrepresentation. It is, at worst, a technical mistake. I doubt any official reviewing your application will even take note of it.



Edit to add reference to additional observations in another topic regarding this --

Obviously I cannot possibly know why @beris or @Alberta30 encountered RQ-related non-routine processing, and thus cannot for certain know that the failure to declare the flagpole event as a day exiting and entering Canada was not much of a factor. BUT it is highly unlikely it was much of a factor. It is highly likely that other circumstances, other factors, triggered the RQ-related processing.

 

[Klamm]

Thank you so much for your reply, dpenabill! It is reassuring to hear this.

Also thanks for quoting the other post. Interesting I was concerned exactly because of the accounts provided by the very two users you mentioned. I was also wondering if there were any additional issues (more than omitting the flagpoling trip) in their cases to cause RQ. This is why I am very interested in hearing other people's first-hand experience with this.

 

[dpenabill]

I was concerned exactly because of the accounts provided by the very two users you mentioned. I was also wondering if there were any additional issues (more than omitting the flagpoling trip) in their cases to cause RQ. This is why I am very interested in hearing other people's first-hand experience with this.

I have further addressed one of the reported experiences in the other topic.

It is important to understand that ANY applicant may get a wide range of non-routine requests, including those which are RQ-related.

It also warrants emphasizing that the "factors" which can influence whether or not IRCC officials have concerns can be entirely innocent and not particularly suspicious at all.

It should be obvious, of course additional omissions or discrepancies, or inconsistencies, will increase the risk of concerns which can trigger RQ-related scrutiny. Likewise anomalies or incongruities in the application.

As mistakes go, however, the failure to include the flagpole trip in presence calculation travel history, that's a very minor one and again, alone, it is not likely to cause problems. I go into some depth in the other topic trying to put this in a broader context.

A key aspect of this is to remember that ANY applicant can be issued RQ-related requests, and even the full-blown CIT 0171 RQ. Mere coincidences can trigger RQ (like having a postal code in the address history that is in an area where addresses have been previously used in cases of suspected fraud).

Thus, for example, in reference to the query posed by @Klamm in particular, my observation that the failure to include the flagpole trip in the calculator travel history should not, not in itself, trigger much if any concern or any RQ-related non-routine processing, that does not mean I am assuring @Klamm there will not be any questions or RQ-related non-routine processing. But of course this isolated factor will be among the full range of things considered by those officials (processing agents and Citizenship Officers) who make the decisions which determine how it goes.

 

[donnakonjio]

Hi everyone,

I just submitted my citizenship application, and now I realize I should've probably logged in the "flagpoling" trip to the US border (to land as a PR) in my physical presence calculator. I know a few minutes at the border does not count as a day, but I am hearing some people have gotten requests for information because of this omission.

Can please those who have actually submitted their applications without including their flagpole trip (if they had one) share their experiences on how this might have affected their cases?

I am concerned about this and want to know if there is anything one can do at this point.

Thank you all so much!

I am the same situation
I could use your experience please
Thank you