Expired PR card
- Thread starter jshahid
- Start date
Yes, it has happened. If immigration finds out, they will revoke their citizenship and possibly their PR.ttrajan said:
You can read here: http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/auditor-general-report-citizenship-1.3563998
They say at the bottom that about 700 revocation cases are pending.
Here is what CIC has to say about it:
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/information/protection/fraud/document.asp
This is what happened with us really , we attended the citizenship exam and we passed , then they send us an official letter for the oath And everything was going great , then the day of the oath when we entered , they told us our names are not there in the list and that they want to check our residency confirmation , that 's why.
So what am I asking , is there any chances as victims to this fraud to renew our PR Card ? Because as I told you before that the lawyer told us that we dont need to stay in Toronto because there is no work in Toronto and we dont know the rules in Canada. , we did whatever the lawyer told us to do because we trusted him . And we have all the emails between us and the lawyer as a proof that he was asking money from us to finish everything , and that he will do everything for us and no need for us to stay in Toronto .
If there is any advice could help us in this case please let me know , thank you
So what am I asking , is there any chances as victims to this fraud to renew our PR Card ? Because as I told you before that the lawyer told us that we dont need to stay in Toronto because there is no work in Toronto and we dont know the rules in Canada. , we did whatever the lawyer told us to do because we trusted him . And we have all the emails between us and the lawyer as a proof that he was asking money from us to finish everything , and that he will do everything for us and no need for us to stay in Toronto .
If there is any advice could help us in this case please let me know , thank you
In that case you should be expecting your PR status to be revoked.Nisso said:
It was your responsibility to understand immigration rules and your responsibility to ensure all of the information in the citizenship information was accurate. CIC will hold you responsible for the fraud.
Again, I would engage an excellent lawyer at this point if you want to try to retain your PR status.
I fully and emphatically concur in the observations by scylla. Especially the suggestion to lawyer-up (not a consultant, but get a legitimate, licensed, reputable, and extensively experienced lawyer) if you have any continued interest in visiting, let alone living in Canada, let alone preserving your PR status itself.Nisso said:
Or, for that matter, if you are currently in Canada, if you are interested in avoiding potential criminal prosecution.
However naï ve you are, and recognizing that you are undoubtedly victims of the crooked consultant, in this scenario it is nonetheless hard to see any level of Canadian government buying anything less than your knowingly making misrepresentations (depending, however, on the details of the fraud).
It is, now, what it is.
Likely the consultant had a client or ten clients caught in the elevated fraud sweep several years ago, leading to identification of the consultant as among those perpetrating these sorts of schemes, leading to the investigation of that consultant's other clients, thus eventually to you. Yes, you are a victim of the consultant because, I assume, you were duped into paying this consultant substantial sums of money for services the consultant could not and did not deliver. But the government is not going to buy lack of intent or knowledge . . . perhaps the government will, for ease of process, as indicated by scylla, rely on your responsibility to know and be accountable for the information submitted . . . but in the scenario you describe, the odds are very high that subjectively any government personnel assessing you and the situation are almost certain to conclude you were willingly and knowingly engaging in the fraudulent scheme.
That is, the government is likely to perceive you were victims of being fraudulently duped into thinking the consultant could arrange for you to get away with fraud. Even if you were, indeed, so naï ve that you actually did not know you were committing fraud, in the scenario you describe my guess is the government will not believe that, but will rather believe you were a willing and knowing participant in the fraud.
I do not make this observation to criticize or shame. I make it because this is, most likely, how it is, the situation you face and if you are in Canada or hoping to return to Canada (even to just visit), what you most likely will need to deal with.
If you are outside Canada and have no future plans to come to Canada, shrug it off. No likely prosecution for a criminal offense if you are outside and stay away from Canada. Just the loss of PR status.
But if you are in Canada now, or hope to come to Canada (even as a visitor), lawyer-up, sooner rather than later, and get a good one, not a consultant, but rather a legitimate, licensed, reputable, and extensively experienced lawyer.
(Since many times consultants are referred to as lawyers, and with only a couple exceptions I am so far aware of, the majority of representatives, or purported professionals assisting immigrants, who were caught perpetrating fraud were consultants, some registered and authorized, most not at all even legitimate consultants, I refer to the perpetrator of the scheme as a "consultant," rather than a lawyer. Because it probably was a "consultant' not a lawyer. But there have been at least two actual lawyers I am aware of who were among those providing fraudulent services of this sort, so it may have been a lawyer. Always, always, do some homework before hiring a professional or assistant of this kind.)
I don't think immigration will see you as a victim in this. You should have informed yourself and you should have read the forms you signed. The application form for citizenship has some text right in the signature box above the signature where it states that if you or somebody on your behalf makes a false representation or fraud, you can be charged with an offence, your citizenship can be revoked and you can be barred from applying for citizenship again for 5 years. Immigration will likely see you as someone who wanted to get a passport without living in Canada and was happy to pay someone to help them arrange that.Nisso said:
However, according to what it says at http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/tools/cit/acquisition/revocation.asp under the heading "Status of a person post-revocation" it does not necessarily cause the loss of PR if you commit misrepresentation on your citizenship application. It says: "If the person’s citizenship was revoked due to false representation or fraud or knowingly concealing material circumstances during the citizenship process only (e.g., lying about residence in Canada during the relevant period), the person becomes a permanent resident as per subsection 46(2) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA). Revocation in such situations does not itself jeopardize the right of the person to remain in Canada; however, the person must meet all obligations under the IRPA. For the residency obligation under the IRPA, the five-year period begins on the date the person becomes a permanent resident."
So if you have 2/5 years in Canada at this point, hence meet the RO as a PR, you may be charged with fraud and have other problems with immigration but you might be able to keep your PR. If you do not have 2/5 years in Canada at this point and they are investigating you anyway for lying on your citizenship application, you will most likely lose your PR.
keesio
VIP Member
- May 16, 2012
- 396
- Category........
- Visa Office......
- CPP-O
- Job Offer........
- Pre-Assessed..
- App. Filed.......
- 09-01-2013
- Doc's Request.
- 09-07-2013
- AOR Received.
- 30-01-2013
- File Transfer...
- 11-02-2013
- Med's Done....
- 02-01-2013
- Interview........
- waived
- Passport Req..
- 12-07-2013
- VISA ISSUED...
- 15-08-2013
- LANDED..........
- 14-10-2013
Unfortunately it is the old adage: Always read and understand what you sign:Nisso said:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/angela-greene/read-and-understand-befor_b_10100598.html
There are many people who have been screwed over because they signed their name on a document without fully understanding what they were signing. Tax forms, immigration form, wills, etc). When you sign, you are on the hook, even if you were misled.
Unfortunately you will have a rough fight ahead of you. As others recommended, get a good, reputable immigration lawyer.
Observation:
The scenario described by Nisso is, essentially, the iconic immigration fraud scenario, the almost classic version, the one which Harper, Kenney, and Alexander so often railed about and in many ways reorganized much of CIC to go after and deal with. It obviously occurred, and more so than a competent bureaucracy should have let get by it. But while it was a problem, many if not most of us felt the Conservatives exaggerated its scope, or at least felt that the response to the problem was worse than the problem itself, given the oft times draconian impact of sweeping measures affecting a high percentage of legitimate and qualified persons. There are, after all, still a significant number of qualified (or at least appear to be qualified, and more than a few insisting so in multiple forums) citizenship applicants who applied a year or more before me, who are still bogged down and waiting (I've been a citizen now for over two and a half years).
And perhaps Nisso and family illustrate that even when such fraud was being committed, to some extent those involved really were mostly trying to manage coming to and making a life in Canada, just not able to do so, so to say, staying-within-the-lines. The latter observation does not condone the fraud. Fraud is what it is.
Ultimately there was no indication that the total number of such frauds was anywhere near the problem the Conservatives railed about. But, as this scenario illustrates, it was common, and more common than the government could tolerate. For those of us who were around these forums back in 2011, 2012, and 2013, we saw the impact, scores and scores of legitimate, qualified, innocent PRs were dragged into draconian procedures, investigated, compelled to submit documentation and information profoundly intrusive into their privacy (including even records showing how much they went to a doctor), and forced to wait grossly excessive periods of time to simply obtain what they were entitled to by law. Many blamed Harper, Kenney, and then Alexander, or accused CIC of being grossly incompetent. A big share of the blame, though, belonged to those who perpetrated these schemes.
We can be sympathetic to the plight and struggle of individuals, including Nisso and family for example, but obviously the scheme involved was a serious effort to not just circumvent but to undermine Canadian law. My sense is that most Canadians expect the government to be tough in these cases.
And, my guess is that despite the new government, with the Liberals now at the helm, these cases are likely to involve strict enforcement. And that is what Nisso and family can probably expect: to encounter a not-much-sympathetic bureaucracy mostly inclined to strictly enforce not just the rules and laws, but to strictly enforce the consequences for engaging in fraud. Nothing to be gained by mincing words about this.
But the scenario here, as described by Nisso, was indeed precisely the primary focus and target of numerous efforts made by the Harper government (from expanded investigatory efforts to elevated enforcement measures, and including many changes in policy, practice, regulations, and statutory provisions) aimed at identifying those involved, and strictly enforcing the rules and laws against these individuals in precisely these scenarios. While perhaps the current administration is not as zealous pursuing these matters, as it was until Minister Alexander's departure last October, most of what will happen in a case like this was probably already in motion before the change in government. And I would not expect much leniency, if any, in the way the Liberals approach these cases. The scenario is, again and after all, the most well-known, high profile, targeted scheme.
I would anticipate little to no leeway or leniency from the government here. In contrast, as Leon described it, IRCC "will likely see you as someone who wanted to get a passport without living in Canada and was happy to pay someone to help them arrange that." Or, as I described it, IRCC is likely to conclude you willingly and knowingly engaged in the fraud -- even if you were so naïve as to not be willingly and knowingly engaging in a fraud -- and even though you were in fact yourselves the victims of fraud.
This is not akin to fudging some details to get through the process more easily. There is a significant risk, if not probability, this scenario will be approached as an outright fraudulent scheme.
But with a caveat, or clarification, since it is apparent that Nisso and family left Canada soon after landing (2004), and have not been living in Canada, and thus probably not in compliance with the PR RO.
And, above and beyond that, more than a few of the individuals (not just the consultants) involved in these schemes have indeed been prosecuted criminally, and here too among changes implemented by the Conservative government before last year's election, was the dramatic tightening of what constitutes "serious criminality" for which PR status can be terminated. This has led to criminal prosecution AND proceedings for removal for at least some of those swept up in the Harper government efforts to interdict precisely these fraudulent schemes.
As I noted, while it depends on the actual details in the fraud itself (including if misrepresentations were made relative to more than just the citizenship application), PR status appears to be at risk for Nisso. And, indeed, the risks could include, possibly, even a sojourn in public housing (of the more secure sort) before Removal. If they are in Canada, they need to lawyer-up, with a good lawyer, sooner rather than later, and absolutely before they have any further transactions with IRCC or CBSA.
If they are abroad and want to come to Canada, they likewise need to lawyer-up, with a good lawyer, sooner rather than later.
But, frankly, if they are abroad, simply taking Canada off their list of places to go again might be the way to go. Burned that bridge, one might say.
The scenario described by Nisso is, essentially, the iconic immigration fraud scenario, the almost classic version, the one which Harper, Kenney, and Alexander so often railed about and in many ways reorganized much of CIC to go after and deal with. It obviously occurred, and more so than a competent bureaucracy should have let get by it. But while it was a problem, many if not most of us felt the Conservatives exaggerated its scope, or at least felt that the response to the problem was worse than the problem itself, given the oft times draconian impact of sweeping measures affecting a high percentage of legitimate and qualified persons. There are, after all, still a significant number of qualified (or at least appear to be qualified, and more than a few insisting so in multiple forums) citizenship applicants who applied a year or more before me, who are still bogged down and waiting (I've been a citizen now for over two and a half years).
And perhaps Nisso and family illustrate that even when such fraud was being committed, to some extent those involved really were mostly trying to manage coming to and making a life in Canada, just not able to do so, so to say, staying-within-the-lines. The latter observation does not condone the fraud. Fraud is what it is.
Ultimately there was no indication that the total number of such frauds was anywhere near the problem the Conservatives railed about. But, as this scenario illustrates, it was common, and more common than the government could tolerate. For those of us who were around these forums back in 2011, 2012, and 2013, we saw the impact, scores and scores of legitimate, qualified, innocent PRs were dragged into draconian procedures, investigated, compelled to submit documentation and information profoundly intrusive into their privacy (including even records showing how much they went to a doctor), and forced to wait grossly excessive periods of time to simply obtain what they were entitled to by law. Many blamed Harper, Kenney, and then Alexander, or accused CIC of being grossly incompetent. A big share of the blame, though, belonged to those who perpetrated these schemes.
We can be sympathetic to the plight and struggle of individuals, including Nisso and family for example, but obviously the scheme involved was a serious effort to not just circumvent but to undermine Canadian law. My sense is that most Canadians expect the government to be tough in these cases.
And, my guess is that despite the new government, with the Liberals now at the helm, these cases are likely to involve strict enforcement. And that is what Nisso and family can probably expect: to encounter a not-much-sympathetic bureaucracy mostly inclined to strictly enforce not just the rules and laws, but to strictly enforce the consequences for engaging in fraud. Nothing to be gained by mincing words about this.
While I agree in general with the observations by keesio, regarding this in particular, what Leon cautioned is probably not just true but the bigger, much more important observation:Nisso said:
There have been many, many cases in which CIC (before it became IRCC) merely imposed the least severe consequences for misrepresentations facilitated or orchestrated by crooked or incompetent consultants, approaching some of the consultant's clients with a degree of compassion and even some leniency (albeit still enforcing the law, just not always so severely). While CIC did not always impose responsibility on the individuals, they almost always did. And IRCC, going forward, almost certainly will do likewise. That's the context for concurring in keesio's observation, about suffering the consequences, being accountable for signing a fraudulent document prepared by someone else.Leon said:
But the scenario here, as described by Nisso, was indeed precisely the primary focus and target of numerous efforts made by the Harper government (from expanded investigatory efforts to elevated enforcement measures, and including many changes in policy, practice, regulations, and statutory provisions) aimed at identifying those involved, and strictly enforcing the rules and laws against these individuals in precisely these scenarios. While perhaps the current administration is not as zealous pursuing these matters, as it was until Minister Alexander's departure last October, most of what will happen in a case like this was probably already in motion before the change in government. And I would not expect much leniency, if any, in the way the Liberals approach these cases. The scenario is, again and after all, the most well-known, high profile, targeted scheme.
I would anticipate little to no leeway or leniency from the government here. In contrast, as Leon described it, IRCC "will likely see you as someone who wanted to get a passport without living in Canada and was happy to pay someone to help them arrange that." Or, as I described it, IRCC is likely to conclude you willingly and knowingly engaged in the fraud -- even if you were so naïve as to not be willingly and knowingly engaging in a fraud -- and even though you were in fact yourselves the victims of fraud.
This is not akin to fudging some details to get through the process more easily. There is a significant risk, if not probability, this scenario will be approached as an outright fraudulent scheme.
I agree with this.Leon said:
But with a caveat, or clarification, since it is apparent that Nisso and family left Canada soon after landing (2004), and have not been living in Canada, and thus probably not in compliance with the PR RO.
Nisso said:
More than that, however, it is also apparent that part of the scheme may have involved submitting false information in an effort to obtain renewal of the PR card. Among changes the Conservative government implemented in the last three years of Harper's term was to increase the severity of consequences for misrepresentations, including in these circumstances, expanding the scope of misrepresentations which can be grounds for PR inadmissibility (leading to loss of PR status).Nisso said:
And, above and beyond that, more than a few of the individuals (not just the consultants) involved in these schemes have indeed been prosecuted criminally, and here too among changes implemented by the Conservative government before last year's election, was the dramatic tightening of what constitutes "serious criminality" for which PR status can be terminated. This has led to criminal prosecution AND proceedings for removal for at least some of those swept up in the Harper government efforts to interdict precisely these fraudulent schemes.
As I noted, while it depends on the actual details in the fraud itself (including if misrepresentations were made relative to more than just the citizenship application), PR status appears to be at risk for Nisso. And, indeed, the risks could include, possibly, even a sojourn in public housing (of the more secure sort) before Removal. If they are in Canada, they need to lawyer-up, with a good lawyer, sooner rather than later, and absolutely before they have any further transactions with IRCC or CBSA.
If they are abroad and want to come to Canada, they likewise need to lawyer-up, with a good lawyer, sooner rather than later.
But, frankly, if they are abroad, simply taking Canada off their list of places to go again might be the way to go. Burned that bridge, one might say.
I feel so bad about my situation , I want to ask about my 14 years old son, he can't renew his PR card ? Is there any way that he could renew his PR card? And I want to ask again , if the government gave license to this consultant , and he told us he is authorized from the government , where is my mistake here when I trusted him? The government must help the victims of fraud and give them another chance by watching them all the way , not to punish them because they trusted an authorized consultant .
It's hard to see you as a victim. Did you bother reading your citizenship application before signing it? If so, didn't you see that there were blatant lies therein about your time spent in Canada? Regardless of whatever your consultant told you, did you not bother reading the bold print that said that you were signing an official document and presenting false information could be a federal crime?Nisso said:
If you wanted to become a citizen of Canada, the least you could have done is familiarized yourself with the basic laws.
Nobody pushed me to lie , as an authorized consultant from the government I trusted him , and he is the one that should not let us sign on something false or wrong and he told us that no need to read anything , and that he did this for so many people and it goes very well with them , he is the one that should not let us to do things wrong because we trusted him , and in everywhere in the world when you trust your consultant that means that he should do things right not wrong . So he is the one that you should blame not us because I have every email from him as a proof of what I am saying .
I think they should give us another chance and this time we will do it right and live and settle in Canada . Thank you
I think they should give us another chance and this time we will do it right and live and settle in Canada . Thank you
Sorry, there is very little good news to offer here. I can understand the pain and frustration, the feeling of dreams being crushed.
Choices have consequences. It would be easy to lecture about individual responsibility, personal accountability, and the need to do one's homework. It would be easy to chastise and repeat admonitions to understand what one is signing before signing. And so on. But as you are experiencing, such lessons are too often learned after the damage has been done.
I cannot offer much hope in a Canadian future for you, if (as it appears) you are not currently living in and present in Canada. My condolences. This is indeed a great country, and I am indeed profoundly grateful that Canada has allowed me to come here, stay here, make this my home, my country. Thus, I have a deep appreciation for your loss. Again, sorry I cannot offer much hope.
Best I can offer is some further insight into the what and why.
Even as to your own PR status, this could make a huge difference.
If you are in Canada, see a lawyer before you do anything with IRCC or CBSA. Make no application for a new PR card for example. But, again if you are in Canada, there is a chance that all that happens is the citizenship application is terminated, nothing more, nothing worse. And then, if and when you are in compliance with the PR Residency Obligation, and IRCC or the RCMP have not commenced any proceedings against you related to misrepresentations, you will be eligible to apply for and be issued new PR cards . . . I would wait as long as practical before doing this, let-the-dust-settle one might say.
In contrast, if you are outside Canada and do not have currently valid PR cards, and you have not spent at least two years out of the last five years in Canada, there is very little chance of saving your PR status. Very, very little.
The situation might be different for your minor child. When the child reaches the age of majority, the child may make an application for a PR Travel Document and submit proof of H&C reasons for why the child should be allowed to retain PR status despite not complying with the PR Residency Obligation. For many, perhaps most PRs who became a PR as a minor child and was removed from Canada while a dependent child, and who seek to return to live in Canada relatively soon after reaching the age of majority, Canada allows them a chance to come to Canada to live, to retain their PR status and settle in Canada. HOWEVER, there is no guarantee of this, none at all, and the risk of a negative outcome in this situation increases if the child has minimal ties to Canada, and especially so if the child has little history of actually living in Canada.
So, whether or not there is a chance, or much of a chance, for your child to retain PR status, probably depends on a number of particular factors. How much time the child has lived in Canada is one important factor. Any other ties to Canada is another.
PR card:
Retaining PR status is not dependent on getting a new PR card. And, getting a new PR card does not necessarily guarantee that one can retain PR status.
Your child's status, for example, does not depend on applying for or obtaining a new PR card.
If your child is in Canada, the child's PR status is probably OK and going to be OK so long as you did NOT make any misrepresentations in the original application for PR status. Child should still wait until meeting the PR RO, which means not traveling outside Canada and not making a PR card application until the child has been in Canada two out of the preceding five years. If the child is in Canada and has been in Canada for more than two years out of the last five, the child should be able to get a new PR card.
If your child is outside Canada and does not have a current PR card, the child will need to apply for and obtain a PR Travel Document. I discussed this process above.
If you contact a lawyer and the lawyer's advice is to apply for new PR cards, you probably want to find another lawyer.
If you have been living in Canada for at least two plus years in the last five, and are currently in Canada, OK, maybe go that route, maybe apply soon for a PR card.
My impression is this is not your situation.
You are not eligible for citizenship. Even if Canada was willing to totally ignore the fact that a fraud was being committed, you still did not meet the residency requirement.
Additionally, it appears you are an inadmissible PR because you have not met the PR Residency Obligation. Here too, even if Canada was willing to totally overlook that a fraud was being perpetrated, if you have not been living in Canada for at least two of the last five years, you failed to meet the PR Residency Obligation.
But, Canada is not at all likely to overlook your role in the fraud.
You either signed documents containing what you knew was false information, or you knowingly allowed someone to sign those documents on your behalf, either knowing they contained false information or at the very least failing to verify the truthfulness of that information.
The signature in those documents, the application and residency calculation, your signature or a signature authorized by you, verifies the truthfulness of what is in the documents. The information was not truthful. The information was relevant and material. This meets the definition of a material misrepresentation on all points.
And you attended an interview, answered questions, and while you have not discussed the details of that interview, at the very least you had to have affirmed the information about living in Canada, information which was not true, otherwise you would not have been scheduled to attend the oath. There is no doubt about your personal participation in the scheme.
Regardless what the consultant or lawyer said to you or promised you, the odds are high if not overwhelming the Canadian government will conclude you willingly and knowingly engaged in making material misrepresentations. And, frankly, that is very much what just about any reasonable decision-maker would conclude.
Thus, yes, there is a risk you could be punished if you are in or come to Canada. More than a few in a situation similar to yours have indeed been prosecuted and convicted of a criminal offense, and thus fined and even incarcerated for a time.
That noted, there is a good chance you will NOT be punished.
We do not know the actual numbers, but my guess is that most are not prosecuted for a criminal offense, and thus are not punished.
As noted above, though, even if the government ignores the fraud, you clearly did not qualify for citizenship and thus cannot be granted citizenship.
Denying citizenship is not punishment. If you did not qualify for citizenship, the government is not going to grant you citizenship anyway. In fact, the government cannot legally grant citizenship if you did not meet the qualifications for a grant of citizenship. Even if you were defrauded by a Citizenship Officer and a Citizenship Judge, promised citizenship and paid money, that would not authorize the government to grant you citizenship.
Similarly in regards to retaining PR status. If you did not comply with the PR Residency Obligation, loss of PR status is not punishment. It is merely the loss of a status because of the failure to meet the conditions for retaining that status.
There is the potential for some punishment short of criminal prosecution, depending on what misrepresentations were made, and when, in particular transactions with CIC, CBSA, or IRCC. A two or five year ban from coming to Canada may be imposed, for example, if you made a material misrepresentation in certain contexts, depending on the date that happened.
But denying citizenship or losing PR status are not considered to be punishment, particularly when based on the fact the individual did not meet the qualifications.
And if you are in Canada, or somehow can come to Canada, or perhaps even from abroad, you could pursue a cause of action in fraud against the consultant (recognizing, however, that by now the consultant has no real resources from which any recovery of damages might come). You are right, the consultant should not have helped let alone encouraged you to make an application containing false information. That is why he was prosecuted. And you could personally sue him as well.
However, your last post tends to indicate you are not quite recognizing the nature or extent of your personal accountability. For example, while the consultant undoubtedly did you wrong, and you most likely have a civil cause of action against the consultant, there is a very real likelihood (if such a lawsuit were made and pursued, even though, again, the consultant probably has no money from which compensation could be taken) a court or jury will see your participation equally culpable, or nearly so, or at least that you do not have, as they say, clean-hands.
Big clue: it is really, really hard to convince the government, a reasonable person, or almost any stranger, that it was reasonable to trust someone, anyone, who says it is OK to lie to the government. Even if that someone was a government official.
In this scenario, many might believe you genuinely felt it was OK to trust the consultant that the lies could and would be gotten away with. That is a different deal. Not one which helps your cause.
Choices have consequences. It would be easy to lecture about individual responsibility, personal accountability, and the need to do one's homework. It would be easy to chastise and repeat admonitions to understand what one is signing before signing. And so on. But as you are experiencing, such lessons are too often learned after the damage has been done.
I cannot offer much hope in a Canadian future for you, if (as it appears) you are not currently living in and present in Canada. My condolences. This is indeed a great country, and I am indeed profoundly grateful that Canada has allowed me to come here, stay here, make this my home, my country. Thus, I have a deep appreciation for your loss. Again, sorry I cannot offer much hope.
Best I can offer is some further insight into the what and why.
You have not been clear about whether you are in Canada now or outside Canada.Nisso said:
Even as to your own PR status, this could make a huge difference.
If you are in Canada, see a lawyer before you do anything with IRCC or CBSA. Make no application for a new PR card for example. But, again if you are in Canada, there is a chance that all that happens is the citizenship application is terminated, nothing more, nothing worse. And then, if and when you are in compliance with the PR Residency Obligation, and IRCC or the RCMP have not commenced any proceedings against you related to misrepresentations, you will be eligible to apply for and be issued new PR cards . . . I would wait as long as practical before doing this, let-the-dust-settle one might say.
In contrast, if you are outside Canada and do not have currently valid PR cards, and you have not spent at least two years out of the last five years in Canada, there is very little chance of saving your PR status. Very, very little.
The situation might be different for your minor child. When the child reaches the age of majority, the child may make an application for a PR Travel Document and submit proof of H&C reasons for why the child should be allowed to retain PR status despite not complying with the PR Residency Obligation. For many, perhaps most PRs who became a PR as a minor child and was removed from Canada while a dependent child, and who seek to return to live in Canada relatively soon after reaching the age of majority, Canada allows them a chance to come to Canada to live, to retain their PR status and settle in Canada. HOWEVER, there is no guarantee of this, none at all, and the risk of a negative outcome in this situation increases if the child has minimal ties to Canada, and especially so if the child has little history of actually living in Canada.
So, whether or not there is a chance, or much of a chance, for your child to retain PR status, probably depends on a number of particular factors. How much time the child has lived in Canada is one important factor. Any other ties to Canada is another.
PR card:
Retaining PR status is not dependent on getting a new PR card. And, getting a new PR card does not necessarily guarantee that one can retain PR status.
Your child's status, for example, does not depend on applying for or obtaining a new PR card.
If your child is in Canada, the child's PR status is probably OK and going to be OK so long as you did NOT make any misrepresentations in the original application for PR status. Child should still wait until meeting the PR RO, which means not traveling outside Canada and not making a PR card application until the child has been in Canada two out of the preceding five years. If the child is in Canada and has been in Canada for more than two years out of the last five, the child should be able to get a new PR card.
If your child is outside Canada and does not have a current PR card, the child will need to apply for and obtain a PR Travel Document. I discussed this process above.
If you contact a lawyer and the lawyer's advice is to apply for new PR cards, you probably want to find another lawyer.
If you have been living in Canada for at least two plus years in the last five, and are currently in Canada, OK, maybe go that route, maybe apply soon for a PR card.
My impression is this is not your situation.
Canada is not going to reward you for being a participant in a fraudulent scheme, even if you were fraudulently induced into participating.Nisso said:
You are not eligible for citizenship. Even if Canada was willing to totally ignore the fact that a fraud was being committed, you still did not meet the residency requirement.
Additionally, it appears you are an inadmissible PR because you have not met the PR Residency Obligation. Here too, even if Canada was willing to totally overlook that a fraud was being perpetrated, if you have not been living in Canada for at least two of the last five years, you failed to meet the PR Residency Obligation.
But, Canada is not at all likely to overlook your role in the fraud.
You either signed documents containing what you knew was false information, or you knowingly allowed someone to sign those documents on your behalf, either knowing they contained false information or at the very least failing to verify the truthfulness of that information.
The signature in those documents, the application and residency calculation, your signature or a signature authorized by you, verifies the truthfulness of what is in the documents. The information was not truthful. The information was relevant and material. This meets the definition of a material misrepresentation on all points.
And you attended an interview, answered questions, and while you have not discussed the details of that interview, at the very least you had to have affirmed the information about living in Canada, information which was not true, otherwise you would not have been scheduled to attend the oath. There is no doubt about your personal participation in the scheme.
Regardless what the consultant or lawyer said to you or promised you, the odds are high if not overwhelming the Canadian government will conclude you willingly and knowingly engaged in making material misrepresentations. And, frankly, that is very much what just about any reasonable decision-maker would conclude.
Thus, yes, there is a risk you could be punished if you are in or come to Canada. More than a few in a situation similar to yours have indeed been prosecuted and convicted of a criminal offense, and thus fined and even incarcerated for a time.
That noted, there is a good chance you will NOT be punished.
We do not know the actual numbers, but my guess is that most are not prosecuted for a criminal offense, and thus are not punished.
As noted above, though, even if the government ignores the fraud, you clearly did not qualify for citizenship and thus cannot be granted citizenship.
Denying citizenship is not punishment. If you did not qualify for citizenship, the government is not going to grant you citizenship anyway. In fact, the government cannot legally grant citizenship if you did not meet the qualifications for a grant of citizenship. Even if you were defrauded by a Citizenship Officer and a Citizenship Judge, promised citizenship and paid money, that would not authorize the government to grant you citizenship.
Similarly in regards to retaining PR status. If you did not comply with the PR Residency Obligation, loss of PR status is not punishment. It is merely the loss of a status because of the failure to meet the conditions for retaining that status.
There is the potential for some punishment short of criminal prosecution, depending on what misrepresentations were made, and when, in particular transactions with CIC, CBSA, or IRCC. A two or five year ban from coming to Canada may be imposed, for example, if you made a material misrepresentation in certain contexts, depending on the date that happened.
But denying citizenship or losing PR status are not considered to be punishment, particularly when based on the fact the individual did not meet the qualifications.
At this stage, who to blame is the least significant aspect of your situation.Nisso said:
And if you are in Canada, or somehow can come to Canada, or perhaps even from abroad, you could pursue a cause of action in fraud against the consultant (recognizing, however, that by now the consultant has no real resources from which any recovery of damages might come). You are right, the consultant should not have helped let alone encouraged you to make an application containing false information. That is why he was prosecuted. And you could personally sue him as well.
However, your last post tends to indicate you are not quite recognizing the nature or extent of your personal accountability. For example, while the consultant undoubtedly did you wrong, and you most likely have a civil cause of action against the consultant, there is a very real likelihood (if such a lawsuit were made and pursued, even though, again, the consultant probably has no money from which compensation could be taken) a court or jury will see your participation equally culpable, or nearly so, or at least that you do not have, as they say, clean-hands.
Big clue: it is really, really hard to convince the government, a reasonable person, or almost any stranger, that it was reasonable to trust someone, anyone, who says it is OK to lie to the government. Even if that someone was a government official.
In this scenario, many might believe you genuinely felt it was OK to trust the consultant that the lies could and would be gotten away with. That is a different deal. Not one which helps your cause.
You are not a victim of fraud and I seriously doubt that you were unaware of the situation and what you were doing. Regardless, even if you were unaware, it was entirely your responsibility to check the citizenship laws and check the forms you were signing, regardless of what the consultant told you.Nisso said:
Your consultant was not "from the government". There is an organization (ICCRC) that is regulated by the government, that merely gives licenses to consultants in certain areas, and addresses any complaints against them from consumers. However the individual you dealt with is working for himself only, as a private entity. The government just made sure he had the basic training/education necessary to become a consultant in the first place. YOU were responsible to ensure what he was doing was legal, and what you were signing was accurate.Nisso said:
What you and your family did makes a mockery of all the hard work and patience of all the other permanent residents and naturalized Canadian citizens, who have followed the rules. I really don't think that you are likely to find much sympathy or support here. Asking for "another chance", considering that you committed residency fraud for both PR and (attempted) citizenship, seems unreasonable.Nisso said: