October 11th 2017 - Citizenship Applicants under 3/5 rule

[Joshua1]

Would wait until we see a flood of similar confirmations before we assume that CIC is processing post Oct 11 applicants on priority.
Unfortunately, from the time of following the passing Bill C-6 in the Senate, have seen far too many users of this forum also try to play mind games with us.

Yes, I agree with you. It's called "trolling".... but there is no need to worry about those who troll in order to make others anxious, for they will reap what they sow.

 

[jsm0085]

Would wait until we see a flood of similar confirmations before we assume that CIC is processing post Oct 11 applicants on priority.
Unfortunately, from the time of following the passing Bill C-6 in the Senate, have seen far too many users of this forum also try to play mind games with us.

I can't even be bothered typing a reply to this - you're so exasperating. If you've followed changes to PR/Citizenship over the last 7 years you'll know that all changes usually result in "quicker processing" because that's part of the aim - to process things in a more efficient manner to prevent backlogs. That's why I got my PR in 6 months instead of 13+ months others waited for who applied only a few months before me.

And I'm sure you're aware that the liberal promise wasn't only to implement the C6 changes but to process applications in a more efficient manner.

If you look at the last 12 months worth of data on the spreadsheet you'll see it was previously quite common for AOR's to be issued quickly but those applications waited longer overall for processing.

 

[GiantPanda]

I can't even be bothered typing a reply to this - you're so exasperating. If you've followed changes to PR/Citizenship over the last 7 years you'll know that all changes usually result in "quicker processing" because that's part of the aim - to process things in a more efficient manner to prevent backlogs. That's why I got my PR in 6 months instead of 13+ months others waited for who applied only a few months before me.

And I'm sure you're aware that the liberal promise wasn't only to implement the C6 changes but to process applications in a more efficient manner.

If you look at the last 12 months worth of data on the spreadsheet you'll see it was previously quite common for AOR's to be issued quickly but those applications waited longer overall for processing.

Lets wait for more statistical data before we conclude that CIC is fast tracking everything. I think we all hope for quick processing so no reason to be exasperated.

 

[itsmyid]

It cant be that only 3


It cant be that only 3 people out of 350 have randomly received the AOR. Either many others who have received them have not updated their statuses here or that they dont know what they have received is indeed the AOR. Fingers crossed!

those 350 are not all under the new rule, some of them submitted under the old rule before Oct 11
also, among those sent after Oct 11, many of them submitted 1 or 2 weeks later

 

[jsm0085]

Lets wait for more statistical data before we conclude that CIC is fast tracking everything. I think we all hope for quick processing so no reason to be exasperated.

Again, I haven't stated that they are. I've stated that it happens. I've also stated that historical data shows that even though the AOR is sometimes received quickly - it doesn't mean the overall processing time is quicker.

 

[hime]

For one applicant,

Application delivered on 16th October,

Received a letter for incomplete package, today.

The letter is dated on 20th October.

https://www.canadavisa.com/canada-i...pplication-returned-due-to-incomplete.525054/

Show some quick activity on CIC side.

 

[CANADIANZ]

For one applicant,

Application delivered on 16th October,

Received a letter for incomplete package, today.

The letter is dated on 20th October.

https://www.canadavisa.com/canada-i...pplication-returned-due-to-incomplete.525054/

Show some quick activity on CIC side.

Good News for everyone!

 

[Joshua1]

Good News for everyone!

It's unreal!

 

[initial]

Thank you for your replay.
I did find the application that I sent on October 11, on the bottom left says CIT 0002(08-2017) E, looks like is not the right one and I don't know how is this possible since I opened the page and completed on October 11. The only way I can think about is that my browser saved somehow older version from days before.
Is it only me that have CIT 0002(08-2017)E version on October 11 ?

Thank you in advance.

Same here !!!
Guess ill wait for their response.

 

[initial]

Few others reported making the same mistake. I know someone mailed another application with the correct forms.

Try calling IRCC and see what your options are.

Any idea what number should i call ?
Thanks.

 

[razerblade]

Any idea what number should i call ?
Thanks.

+1 888-242-2100

 

[Najimi]

It Is a good news that some people who applied after 11october got AOR already. I just noticed that all of the three applicant who got AOR are single. processing single application may take less time as compared to family applications and those who have travelled outside of Canada.

 

[ASMIA]

Hello guys,

I am stuck with Q.9(c) and Q.11.
9(c): I have visited my home country for 5 weeks during the eligibility period, but the form CIT 0177 does not apply to me. What should I select?
11: I worked in a company whose address is in Calgary, AB. But I worked in the Saskatoon, SK area and there was no fixed office in my work area because I audited various stores of a different company. What address should I use?

Also do I need to send 2 photo ids along with copy of passport or one id along with copy of passport?

Thanks!

 

[gino007]

Hello guys,

I am stuck with Q.9(c) and Q.11.
9(c): I have visited my home country for 5 weeks during the eligibility period, but the form CIT 0177 does not apply to me. What should I select?
11: I worked in a company whose address is in Calgary, AB. But I worked in the Saskatoon, SK area and there was no fixed office in my work area because I audited various stores of a different company. What address should I use?

Also do I need to send 2 photo ids along with copy of passport or one id along with copy of passport?

Thanks!

This is to the best my knowledge after talking to couple of lawyers. in regards to 9c, technically speaking you have not lived abroad. Living would when you would have moved there for good for let say couple of months or if your intention of going there for 5 weeks was to actually live there. If this was the case, and you moved to live there for 5 weeks (as you can see, there are different ways to interpret this), you can then answer yes, and fill out the CIT 0177 while crossing off everything as N/A. This way you have been very truthful and not misrepresented in any way possible.

In regards to the other part for q.11. Put yourself in the shoes of the officer, what is important for them? To know that you were technically in Canada and also to know exactly what you were doing. Your physical city is important so, Saskatoon, SK would be the city and province. When it comes to the address, try to be as honest as possible, list either some or all addresses you worked at on a separate sheet while referencing them on the original form. The other way if you want to avoid the extra sheet, is to reference one of the addresses on CIT0002 and then in your cover letter (make one if you dont have one) explain the details and try to give all the addresses you worked at. Again, in this way, you are being extra careful not to misrepresent anything. I must say that to a logical person, it is just important that you were physically present in Canada in a certain city. You just need to justify it a bit to explain about the nature of your job that required you to move.

One id along the passport is enough, but it doesnt seem to hurt two

 

[thebassi35]

Please Add Me too
ID - thebassi35
Location - Vancouver
Physical presence days -1133
Application sent - Oct 12,2017
Application delivered - Oct 16,2017
Application Type- Single