Is the Finger Print request done to check criminal backgrounds and confirm identity ? Is it requested after other background checks ?
Forum participants have reported receiving a request for fingerprints at various stages of processing, ranging from soon after AOR to long after the test and PI Interview.
There are many reasons why IRCC might request an applicant's fingerprints. While verification of identity is usually the specific reason, there are various reasons why IRCC needs or wants FPs to verify the applicant's identity, which can range from simply verifying the applicant is NOT someone else (such as a name hit in GCMS) to making the request on behalf of government partners (like the RCMP or CSIS asking for FPs in conducting criminal and security checks).
"Background checks" is itself a big subject more extensively discussed in numerous other topics, including many specifically about background checks. That said, most references to "background checks" in this forum tend to be about two of the three formal clearances, the RCMP criminality clearance and the CSIS security clearance. As noted, a FP request may actually arise because the RCMP or CSIS has notified IRCC it needs the FPs to complete its respective clearance. But that is just one reason, among many others, why there is a FP request for a particular applicant.
The third formal clearance is actually done repeatedly throughout the process: the GCMS clearance. Last seen internal guidelines specified that a GCMS clearance is MANDATORY every time any action is taken on an application. So there is at least a GCMS background clearance conducted somewhat contemporaneously with the initial completeness check in CPC-Sydney, another done attendant the test and interview, and another done attendant scheduling the applicant for the oath. Any of these checks could result in a FP request.
Hi. That's a wonderful, insightful explanation of what might happen to an application. Speaking of side-trips, what would happen to an application if some aspects of the personal situations change, such as, changing the current job, getting a new job, expiry of the health card? As I understand, the applicant is supposed to notify IRCC of any change in situation.
I am changing my job and my health card will expire soon. Will my application take side trips, leaving the main queue?
There is no obligation to report changes in employment AFTER the application has been made (see explanation below, distinguishing *historical* information as information which does not change). Renewed or replaced drivers licenses or health care cards do NOT need to be reported to IRCC.
Individual applicants will NOT even notice many (probably most) "side trips." All applicants see is that the processing timeline for individuals varies.
HISTORICAL INFORMATION DISTINGUISHED:
The signature box on the application requires the applicant verify he or she will notify IRCC of any material change in the information provided in the application. MOST of the information provided is HISTORICAL. Historical information does not change, cannot change. (What has happened in the past is what happened in the past.) For example, address history and employment history are HISTORICAL information. Another example is the applicant's travel history. Job changes AFTER applying do not change any of the employment history reported in the application. Travel abroad after applying does NOT change the travel history reported in the application.
BUT some key information is not historical. Current contact information including current residential address, for example. So any change in where the applicant lives requires notice to IRCC of the change. Many of the prohibitions items reference ongoing status or matters, so applicants are required to notify IRCC of any arrests, criminal charges, or such, which happen after applying. In particular, those items asking for "Are you now . . . " information require notice to IRCC if this information changes.
How strictly the required notice is enforced is NOT at all clear. It is readily apparent, for example, applicants sometimes fail to timely, let alone promptly notify IRCC of a change in address. Technically the failure to provide information can constitute a misrepresentation by omission. But there are very few reports this happens . . . more often, when IRCC is aware of the change it asks the applicant questions related to the change, such as during an interview when an applicant's identification shows an address different from the residential address the applicant has provided IRCC. As to the prohibitions, last I have seen applicants are still being specifically asked to verify NO prohibitions, in writing, during the interview and usually again for the oath, rather than merely relying on the applicant's obligation to advise IRCC of any change in this information.
My understanding of item 13 (in current CIT 0002 (03-2019) version of application), for example, which asks "Do you currently . . . [have] immigration status" in another country, is that applicants who acquire a U.S. Green Card while their Canadian citizenship application is pending have an obligation to notify IRCC of this. Yet, other than being asked about it during an interview, I have not seen anyone who has obtained a GC while their application is pending report being penalized for not notifying IRCC.
ERRORS IN HISTORICAL INFORMATION:
As noted, historical information is past tense information, which cannot change. Sometimes an applicant makes mistakes and submits an application with information the applicant later realizes is NOT correct. If the error is relatively small and is not directly about a qualification, typically the applicant can wait until the test date interview and address changing the information in the course of the interview. In contrast, if the application contains any significant errors, or any misinformation directly related to a qualification, the applicant should notify IRCC of the error and provide a correction as soon as possible after AOR (the notice of AOR will have a file number which needs to be used in any communication about the application, including sending notice of corrections or changes).
More re Side Trips:
Note: many "side trips" are insignificant. We do not know the precise mechanics of application processing. We do know, for example, there are multiple checks/tasks done at CPC-Sydney before the application is referred to a local office, but the precise details of this are confidential information withheld from the public. Any one of those checks could involve a small "side trip" for verification of this or that detail. Time to do the task itself is almost certainly a matter of minutes. But if it involves going into a queue for that task, the queue for this or that particular verification could be a day or ten days or weeks. So the timeline between AOR and "In Process" (the latter being when CPC-Sydney makes the referral to a local office) varies some from one applicant to another; sometimes merely a difference of days, sometimes weeks or even months. Other side trips are a big deal. Like full blown RQ, which involves CIT 0171.
