Loulou79 said:
Hello,
My old passport expired in June 2013 and the new passport was issued in September 2013. Wile reviewing my citizenship application, the settlement consultant advised to enclose a letter clarifying why there is a gap!!!
He said they might return my application because of the gap!! a gap means that I have another passport!!
The gap is
probably short enough to not be problematic overall, in terms of the credibility of your application and accounting of absences and presence overall,
so long as you adequately explain the gap.
However, yes, the consultant is correct to point out that such gaps risk, or may even likely result, in the return of the application unless
adequately explained.
Which, frankly, should be obvious. (Reminder:
if in doubt, follow the instructions, otherwise, yep, follow the instructions.)
The document checklist states that the applicant needs to include:
Photocopies of biographical pages of passports and/or travel documents covering the six (6) years immediately before the date of you application, or since you became a permanent resident, whichever is most recent.
If that is not clear enough, the Guide specifically states:
Note: If your passports and/or travel documents have any gaps in the time they cover during the past six (6) years, or since you became a permanent resident, whichever is more recent, attach an explanation.
This note is actually highlighted in the guide. Rather obvious.
Indeed, it does not get much more straight-forward than that. After all, what would
"covering the six years" mean other than actually covering the six years?
I am sometimes charged with being condescending, especially when I repeat admonitions like "
if in doubt, follow the instructions, otherwise, yep, follow the instructions."
But the number one reason why applicants run into processing trouble has nothing to do with the merits of their case, but is due to failing to follow the instructions.
We all know how important it is to follow the instructions. And we all fail to adequately, let alone thoroughly, read the instructions. Me included. It is hard. So much seems easy and intuitive. We readily gloss over what seems to be merely so-called
boiler-plate.
But the actual instructions matter. Hence the need for the reminder.
There are, by the way, multiple topics here which were started by applicants surprised when their applications were returned due to gaps in the periods of time covered by the passport(s) copies they submitted. Yes, IRCC does screen the application and submitted documents to check that what is required to make a complete, formal application is actually submitted.
Substantive concerns about gaps in time covered by applicant's passports:
It cannot be emphasized enough that the burden of proof is on the applicant.
Perhaps the most far-reaching misunderstanding applicants have is that IRCC does not look for what establishes an applicant's eligibility for citizenship. It is entirely on the applicant to put into IRCC's lap the information necessary to establish the applicant's qualifications for citizenship.
Thus, it is not only imperative that an applicant affirmatively establish dates of travel exiting and entering Canada, supported by indications of a life lived in Canada (work and address history at the least), but that the application sufficiently illuminate there is no reason for IRCC to apprehend, let alone overtly suspect, the possibility of undisclosed travel.
A huge factor in this is assurance the applicant has disclosed, to IRCC,
all travel documents which the applicant could possibly have used during the relevant time period.
A few months between the expiration of a passport and the date a new one is issued should be no problem. But of course the applicant needs to explain this. And, of course, there needs to be no indication there was any international travel in that interim.
Obviously, any indication of international travel during the gap period would suggest, if not overtly indicate, the PR was using some other travel document. And if no other travel document is revealed to IRCC, well that would indeed spell T-R-O-U-B-L-E. All caps warranted.
In contrast, IRCC wants to see assurance there was no other travel document. So it can be readily inferred that the applicant's account of no travel during that time period truly reflects that there was no travel.
By the way:
You have indicated many reasons why you should seriously consider a longer, not shorter, margin over and above meeting the minimum physical presence requirements. As I have otherwise noted, how much of a margin an individual should have before applying is very personal, dependent on the individual's personal circumstances. Some can easily sail through the process with a minimal margin. Others should consider waiting to apply until they have a bigger margin. From UAE permits to this
gap in passport coverage, you have revealed a number of factors which suggest prudence leans toward a bigger margin.
