+1(514) 937-9445 or Toll-free (Canada & US) +1 (888) 947-9445
That as per the law, if they had 1095 eligible residency dates as of October 10th, they were eligible to apply on the 11th.
I hope this settles it for everybody:

Image%202017-10-13%20at%204.32.58%20PM.png
 
But if you read the instructions guide, it states

"We need to know all the names you have ever used in your life, so we can verify your identity. If you used any other names other than the one being requested in your grant of citizenship application, print them in the chart. Examples: Name at time of birth, name before marriage, previous married names, married names, nick names or any other names you have used. If you have legally changed your name, see Legal Change of Name"
I get it but its still confusing:
if you don't read the help section it states:
"List all names that you have used,including name of birth,...."
 
I get it but its still confusing:
if you don't read the help section it states:
"List all names that you have used,including name of birth,...."

Yes. It's extremely poor wording. If you have listed your name, at birth (again), it won't be an issue. The application will be processed without issue. I'd bet my life on it ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: dpenabill
Yes. It's extremely poor wording. If you have listed your name, at birth (again), it won't be an issue. The application will be processed without issue. I'd bet my life on it ;)
I think If we read the help ,its clear what they are asking for :
We need to know all the names that you have ever used in life, so we can verify your identity. If you have used any other names other than the one being requested in your grant of Citizenship application, print them in the chart.
I agree there is ambiguity in questions
 
It's clear if you read the help - but help is usually something people click on when they don't understand the question. I understood the question - it just so happens they have asked for something they don't actually want. The real "question" is actually located under help.

The error lies with IRCC for this one.
 
Last edited:
Hi, what is the new requirement for police certificate. the requirement is if you have spent more than 183 days outside Canada in the last 4 years then once has to provide police certificate. I am unable to understand this requirement as this can apply to every one who is finishing 3 years now. also, it can be very hard to obtain it from abroad.
 
not sure if i got it right from your message,
I think you should have added your name and mark "Name at birth" for the first row and obviously leave the rest blank or N/A. they specifically wrote
"including Name at birth"...
Yup
 
Again, at the risk of being too repetitive, but my best effort (within time constraints given a looming deadline to submit a manuscript in my day job) to offer some input in the overflow of threads addressing numerous issues, questions, and concerns, and much confusion, related to the roll out of the new form, new rules, and new instructions for citizenship applications, it seems warranted, to me, to repeat with some emphasis a recognition of the problems juxtaposed with positive assurance that IRCC will almost certainly work its way through most of the issues.

In particular . . .

CAUTION: rollout pitfalls; pretty form not-so-pretty muddle; BUT there are reasons to RELAX

As I had cautioned, well before October 11, the roll out of the new citizenship application rules and process probably would be (and it is) fraught with issues. But for the details, the new application form is pretty, a format which office manager types should appreciate, since in form it appears to be user-friendly while at the same time processing-friendly. As usual, however, the devil lurks ominously in the details. And no more than a glance is necessary to see problems lurking in some of the details, as is amply illustrated by the plethora of questions and confusion being discussed in many new topics here.

At this juncture many have already sent their applications off. And it appears many more will do so today or tomorrow. Not the prudent way to navigate this but what is in the hopper is in the hopper, or to mangle metaphors, the cake is in the oven and it is time to wait to see if it rises properly.

But there are reasons to RELAX, to not worry so much.

This is true for those who have (imprudently in my view) rushed sending off an application, and for those preparing an application who are struggling with the many vague, ambiguous, or otherwise problematic questions and instructions.

IRCC is almost certainly going to exercise a good deal of flexibility in how it handles the first batch of applications using the new form and presence calculator.

Sure, many if not most of those who rushed to apply right away can anticipate the processing of their applications to be delayed some, compared to applications made after the-dust-settles, so to say. But for the vast majority of applicants who rushed, that should be the worst of it, a little or a moderate delay in processing. No big deal. No long-term delays. Not much risk of a negative outcome.


In particular, overall:

Applicants who submit an application which is complete and on its face demonstrates their qualification for citizenship, and who make a concerted effort to understand what was requested, as best they can, and who provide as best they can, according to their best assessment of how to respond based on the facts in their situation, a complete, accurate, and honest response, it is most likely all will go well, NO PROBLEM, perhaps some inherent, inevitable delays due to the roll-out-blues, but no serious problems. IRCC is going to accept and deal with various approaches to answering numerous parts of this form, at least until the dust settles and there is more clarification about what IRCC expects.


The above is in large part derived from a longer post, from more detailed observations including discussion about some of the more salient issues. Follow link in quote below to see full post.


But there are reasons to RELAX, to not worry so much.

This is true for those who have (imprudently in my view) rushed sending off an application, and for those preparing an application who are struggling with the many vague, ambiguous, or otherwise problematic questions and instructions.

IRCC is almost certainly going to exercise a good deal of flexibility in how it handles the first batch of applications using the new form and presence calculator.

As badly as the roll out has gone, as poorly composed the form is, and despite that steepest part of the learning curve those total-stranger-bureaucrats will be struggling with when they are processing the first batch of new-rules-new-form applications, IRCC is going to work, and probably work very hard, to make all this work, and thus IRCC will almost certainly be understanding and perhaps very liberal in how it assesses responses to the more confusing and problematic items.
 
please, I need some help with question 16. Is it just for the eligibility period 2012 to 2017? My concern is because back in 2006 I was asked to leave Canada, which I did. In 2013 I became as a PR. Thank you.
 
Last edited:
Guys, i missed the required to file column in taxes question, i ticked yes i have filed taxes column for 5 yrs but didnt ticked required to file column, i thought we are required to tick either of the column, is it a big mistake???
 
If my application is returned because of date error (to date is less than from date), is it bad for my future application?

Also, for the question ' have you applied before', I guess I should answer yes?
 
Please, I need some help with question 16. Is it just for the eligibility period, or it includes years prior 2012? Thank you
 
Yes. They are checking 1) do you have income? I.e do you need to file 2) did you actually file

I believe they are looking for a minimum of 3 returns in the last 5 years.

If you haven't it'll be a problem for your application.