Entering Canada with an expired PR card - urgent please help.

[rish888]

CBSA does not keep statistics on how many people are able to cross without issue, but they do keep records on how many PRs' are given departure orders. Based on this what is seen is that Quebec issues the highest number of Departure Orders (though ironically IAD appeals have the highest rate of success in Quebec) while BC comes it at 2nd. Ontario seems to have the lowest number. (Half of BC, around 1/8 of Quebec.)

The inference that can be made is that if one is looking for the "best chance," that seems to be Ontario. (Though it is still very much possible that you may encounter a sympathetic officer in Montreal as much as you may encounter a by-the-books one in Ontario.)

You are correct in your belief that people do get in without being reported; however, one cannot say exactly to what degree this is true since there are no statistics on the number of PR's who enter with an unfulfilled RO.

CBSA officers have far more discretion in who to report. While there have been decisions limiting the discretion of officers in cases concerning criminality or where when poses a danger to public safety, a CBSA officer has the ultimate say on whether he/she decides to prepare an inadmissibility report or not. No one can question why a CBSA officer on their decision to report or not to report.

In fact, Operation Manuals state the officers should consider if there are other alternatives that may be available. (Thus the anecdotal evidence of some people having had their violation discovered, but having got off with a stern warning and some counseling on their obligations.)

This is in contrast with applications for a PRTD, where for one to be approved, the visa officer must be satisfied your H&C considerations warrant special relief. A CBSA officer is not required to be convinced of one's H&C reasons to not prepare a report. (Which is why even if someone doesn't have any H&C reasons, the officer may still give the person a break.)

Entering though a land POE does not offer any guarantees. Nothing prevents you from being report and nothing prevents you from being issued a departure order; however, if I had to choose I would choose land for a couple of reasons:

Saving precious time and money by applying for a PRTD.

Not having to deal with the anxiety.

Knowing that whatever happens at the land POE you can enter the country as a PR.

(The supposed leniency doesn't hurt either!)

 

[rish888]

They would have to build the infrastructure to allow such stamps. For example, EU countries have the infrastructure for exit controls at airports. But if Canada were to introduce them now, basically all Canadian airports that handle international flights would have to be reorganized. For example, at the moment, flights from Canada to Europe and flights from Canada to Canada can be handled in the same waiting area/the same gates. If they introduced exit stamps now, domestic and international passengers would have to be separated after the exit controls.

Not to mention that leaving a country is a fundamental right in many places. Many people would consider exit checks incompatible with one's right to leave their country freely and without hindrance.
There are many arguments for exit checks, but they current system has been working just fine in so many countries for so many years that there is no reason to change it.

 

[spyfy]

Not to mention that leaving a country is a fundamental right in many places. Many people would consider exit checks incompatible with one's right to leave their country freely and without hindrance.
There are many arguments for exit checks, but they current system has been working just fine in so many countries for so many years that there is no reason to change it.

Yeah generally exit checks have pros and cons. But I think with exit checks vs. no exit checks it is a little bit like with left- and right-hand traffic. You could argue forever which one is better, but it doesn't actually matter because it is now too late to change from one to the other.

 

[dpenabill]

one other thing which i am wondering is how many of these people do you know personally who have been flagged/reported/scrutinized while 'cutting-it-close' ?

because in this thread alone we have numerous instances of people travelling in from US on an expired PR card and entering Canada without even being reported.

So the impression i get is that the CBSA people are generally pretty lenient. And only if you are really unlucky would you even get reported and that too on an expired PR card .

I know what the rules say but , judging by this thread/forum i get the feeling that in reality a lot of people they just re-enter Canada without being reported regardless of their RO

This was largely answered above:

You are correct in your belief that people do get in without being reported; however, one cannot say exactly to what degree this is true since there are no statistics on the number of PR's who enter with an unfulfilled RO.

I concur in most of the observations made in that post. But, for clarity, the caution I recently expressed also applies to PRs who have a currently valid PR card, not just those with an expired PR card (or no PR card). This was in response to queries you pakopite posed (I previously, erroneously, referred to these as the "OP's" queries).

While I know no one personally (outside online interactions) who has been issued a 44(1) Inadmissibility Report at a PoE, I know more than a few PRs who have gone way out of their way to avoid being abroad without a currently valid PR card including American citizens who can use their U.S. passport to board a flight to Canada, including some who cancelled trips abroad, at some cost, when they were not able to obtain a new PR card in time for the trip. By the way, their decision-making in this regard was not influenced by me. I have only offered related suggestions to a few close associates who have been PRs for several decades, living in Canada full time for decades, to whom I suggested that perhaps it was time for them to apply for citizenship. (All the PRs I know personally actually live in Canada and are no where near being in breach of the PR RO.)

I mention this to highlight that whatever the in-fact statistics might be, my sense is that many, many more PRs avoid putting themselves at risk. The other side of this coin, so to say, is that the vast, vast majority of PRs returning to Canada, being examined upon arrival, have no issues, minimal if any risks, and there is little or nothing about them which is likely to trigger a referral to Secondary let alone elevated scrutiny in Secondary.

In the meantime, there has been a fairly clear trend in anecdotal reporting indicating that the risks are higher now of a referral to Secondary, and elevated scrutiny in Secondary, for both PRs without a valid PRC, and for PRs with a valid PRC but who have been abroad for years. The reporting is too sketchy and sporadic to draw statistical conclusions from it, but in recent years there is no where near the volume of reports about PRs in these risk-groups being waived-through as there was prior to the Harper-era escalation of interdiction and enforcement of the PR Residency Obligation.

Also, in the meantime, published IAD decisions include scores of actual cases in which PRs have been reported and issued a Departure Order at a PoE, including numerous such cases in which the PR presented a valid PRC upon arrival.

In conjunction, there is no mistaking the trend has been to increase screening and increase enforcement.

In this regard, when I began following these issues more than eight years ago, in multiple forums, discussions about PoE 44(1) Reports were minimal and anecdotal reports very few and far in-between. Similarly as to discussions about PR TD applications. There were very, very few reports from individuals involved in an appeal. Just the escalating noise (so to say) relative to these matters is revealing.

In any event, from my view the most telling sources are the published IAD decisions, where some of the more recent actual cases involve a new PR (PR for less than five years) being issued a 44(1) Report and Departure Order at a PoE even though their PR card is still valid for more than another year and a half. I have read cases in which even a PR who had somewhat regularly come to Canada to visit family was reported and lost PR status, which I mention because in addition to having a PR card valid for around another year, the duration of his absences were less than a year (at a time), a circumstance which previously seemed to involve very little risk of PoE questioning as to PR RO compliance. (Obviously, the pattern of absences must have revealed the extent of them combined.)

Are some, perhaps many PRs, still being waived through the PoE despite being in the risk-groups? For sure some. And more than a few with strong Canadian ties and in circumstances indicating they are on track to settle permanently in Canada, are probably waived through after a Secondary examination despite indications they might be technically in breach of the PR RO.

But for those in the risk-groups I have described, the risks are real, and even though we cannot quantify the risks, the severity of the consequences can be weighed. The severity of the consequences, however, are not the same for every PR. Some, for example, could lose PR status and still be sponsored again. Some PRs have stronger H&C cases, so even if Reported, they have better odds of keeping PR status, either based on a favourable decision from the Minister's Delegate, or in the appeal before the IAD. For some PRs, losing PR status will quite likely close the door on living in Canada.

Finally, as a reminder, no extra degree of scrutiny is required if a PR has been abroad for three years. That is an obvious breach. And a big part of the caution is that just approaching that amount of time abroad is bound to invite further screening and elevated, perhaps skeptical scrutiny. No advanced degrees in nuclear physics necessary to apprehend how this factors into the equation.

 

[pakopite]

A big thank you to everyone involved.

For the record, I have now changed my plans of cutting-it-close, so guess i would be safe either ways now.

Thanks again @dpenabill and @rish888 !

 

[dpenabill]

Further observations regarding exit control, or at least recording and maintaining data as to exit event:

There is some irony swirling beneath the surface here. There is no hint, none whatsoever, that Canada is moving or will move toward overt exit screening and record keeping. All the ranting and railing about this is to no avail. Not going to happen, not in the foreseeable future.

But, make no mistake, the government's capabilities in gathering or knowing dates of exit have dramatically increased over the years, and apparently will continue to increase. What this amounts to is that the government, including CBSA and IRCC in particular, will have continually greater ability to identify if and when someone is providing false or erroneous information about travel dates, and that is likely to be their focus: the use of such information to identify if and when a PR or citizenship applicant has failed to provide accurate information.

There is little doubt, IRCC will continue to require PRs to carry the burden of reporting, and if questioned, proving when they were in Canada. Just as it does now with CBSA travel history showing entry dates into Canada, IRCC will not use this information to do its own residency calculation, but rather will use it to identify if and when the PR's information fails to be accurate.



Further observations regarding the weight given passport stamps:

Federal Court Justice Shore has very recently stated:
"It is trite law that passport stamps alone are not indicative of a permanent resident’s physical presence in Canada."

see http://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/234429/index.do

Years ago, when I was just getting acquainted with Canadian jurisprudence, the phrase "trite law" threw me some. I understood (actually I misunderstood) "trite" to be dismissive, a reference to something of diminutive value. In Canadian law, I have learned, this refers to a legal principle so well-established, so firm and certain, there is no question at all about its validity.

There are IAD decisions which explicitly refer to passport stamps as reliable evidence of presence or absence from Canada.
see, for example, http://canlii.ca/t/gm66q
The reference is to passport stamps as reliable "evidence," not as "proof" let alone conclusive proof. Obviously, passport stamps are direct evidence of the event indicated. And in combination with other evidence, an entry stamp showing entry into another country can help to show when a PR left Canada. That falls way short of being proof.

In the meantime, several IAD decisions also affirm that passport stamps alone do not establish or prove presence in Canada; for example, one IAD panel stated:
". . . it is established in case law that passport stamps alone cannot demonstrate an appellant’s residence in Canada. Stamps demonstrate only that a person passed through a country’s point of entry or exit at a specific time."
see http://canlii.ca/t/gxdgj

In perusing actual cases as reflected in both official IAD decisions and official Federal Court decisions, it is readily apparent that the primary focus and effect of passport stamps is mostly about verification, or the contrary, contradiction. Stamps are examined to determine if they are consistent with and corroborate declared dates of travel, or to see if they reveal an inconsistency or omission in a PR's declared dates of travel.

 

[kashifHbhatti]

I have questions if i can revoke my PR status. Pardon me for the length of querry as wanted to give details . I first landed in Canada in Aug-2005 with my wife and 4 months old daughter, we received our PR card , SIN number etc and we returned back to pack up , sell some property and resign the job, during this process, my wife started having serious health issue, like fainting, losing weight etc and it took us almost a year to diagnose , even went for bone marrow finally discovered that she has srotic lever hypertension and her white blood counts below 50,000(very low). We were advised by the doctor to slow her down dont let her BP go up etc. She wanted to be close to her family .During this process we were also blessed with two sons, one in Dec 2007 and one in June 2010, and obviously it was very closely supervised deliveries , like giving her plasma injections etc , but she really wanted to extend the family . Unfortunately in April 2014,she died of sudden heart attack. Its been difficult time and i needed to be close to my relatives to give emotional support to my kids especially inlaws . Now i wanted to explore the possibility
1) if i can renew my PR on humanitarian grounds, or enter Canada
2) Only my daughter has expired PR both sons were born after our return from Cananda
3) I do have US visa ,
Your insights will be highly appreciated

 

[Rob_TO]

1) if i can renew my PR on humanitarian grounds, or enter Canada
2) Only my daughter has expired PR both sons were born after our return from Cananda
3) I do have US visa ,

You can certainly attempt to apply for a PR Travel Document with your H&C reasons as you explained. However for such a long absence (12 years) from Canada without spending any time here, I would have to imagine it would be very difficult to have this accepted no matter the reasons. But ultimately the only decision that matters is that of the visa officer reviewing the PR TD app, as they can use their own discretion.

If H&C reason is accepted, you and your daughter will get a PR TD, can return back to Canada, and then immediately apply to renew PR card and sponsor your other kids. Just note in this case, your non-PR kids would need a TRV or TRP approved to go to Canada with you as visitors (if not visa-exempt passports). If they can't get this, you would need to return to Canada alone (or just with daughter) to start sponsoring your kids while they remain in home country. For PRs there is no way to sponsor kids while not living in Canada, under any situation.

If H&C reasons are not accepted and PR TD is denied, it would start process to revoke you and your daughters PR status permanently.

You can also try to enter Canada via USA land border to "sneak" into Canada without being reported by CBSA, but even if successful this would be incredibly difficult as you would need to remain physically inside Canada for 2 straight years without leaving for any reason, and you couldn't start sponsorship for your kids for 2 years also. Plus you may just be reported by CBSA for not meeting RO.

There is a final option too - do nothing. If you never attempt to apply for anything or get to Canada again, you and your daughter will keep PR status since you will not come to attention of IRCC or CBSA. You of course will probably never be able to return to Canada using this PR status, however your daughter is only 12 years old now and was removed from Canada as a minor, which is a perfectly valid and commonly accepted H&C reason. When she is around 18-20 years old or so, she can apply for a PR TD and would have an excellent chance to be approved and could move to Canada to go to school or work here, and later on get citizenship. This doesn't help you or your other kids much, but would allow her at least to continue her PR status.

 

[Buletruck]

Personally, I believe an attempt at H&C will likely result in refusal. Cirrhosis of the liver and resulting hypertension is a treatable condition that could have been done in Canada. I understand the desire to remain close to family, but that is a personal choice. Treatment doesn't prevent travel, so family visits would be possible. The extended stay (3 years) after your wife's death also adds to remaining being a personal choice.

 

[Ovean.mahcine]

Hi there, I applied for a pr card renewal in July with the hope of going on my honeymoon in September, unfortunately the card didn't come through and I left the country without a current PR card with the thought process being, that I'd be able to obtain a PRTD. That process will take longer than I am scheduled to be away for and now I don't know how I'm going to return to my life. I meet all residency requirements, have been a permanent resident since 2009 and left the country for a combined total of a month. I'm aware it was a bad decision I'm hignsite, but I'd really like to know how I can get back home.

 

[Buletruck]

Do you have a US visa? If you do you can cross at any land POE into Canada and continue from there.

 

[Ovean.mahcine]

I don't, I'm a British citizen and only hold a UK passport.

 

[Buletruck]

You could apply for an ESTA .....and travel to the A US city close to the border and cross that way.

 

[Ovean.mahcine]

Would I need the esta to enter the USA or Canada?

 

[Buletruck]

Just for the US. CBSA can determine you are a PR at the POE. No pr card required. Might be a bit of a delay while they confirm it.