Personal History

[alf+jlh]

Hi Everyone,
My husband (American) and i(Canadian) are working night and day to get our paperwork completed for him to move up to Canada.
With that said i have a few questions and was hoping someone out there that has been in our position before can help us out.
1. In respect to the Personal History section: it says to include all information from the age of 18 or the last 10 years (which ever is first)
My husband is 35 - so to us we assume that he only needs to fill out the info for the last 10 years (since he was 25). However i have read other posts on here where someone asked a similar questions and the response back was NO you must include information from 18.
We're a tad confused.

2. Medical Check - when he goes for his medical check is there an expiration date from the time the doctors signs off? Whats confusing us here is that we've read that some people are submitting their medical after their application, doesnt that slow down the entire process?


We've read so much over the last few weeks that its all seeming very overwhelming.

I appreciate any help you guys can offer. These forums provide a lot of comfort and confidence during this very emotional time.

Thanks Amanda + John

 

[CharlieD10]

I'm the same age as your husband, and I submitted all information since I was 18. So far as I understood the question, it was whichever period is "longer". Since I had to submit additional things like police certificates for every country I had lived in since I was 18, I felt this was the correct interpretation, that 18 was the starting point for my personal history (when I became a legal adult for most purposes) that concerned them.

The medical check expires a year after it was done. Some classes of applicants submit their medicals after the application is submitted, but for spousal applications the medical must be submitted WITH the application.

 

[alf+jlh]

THANK YOU!!!

I just re-read the wording and it says "...since the age of 18, or the past 10 years, which ever comes first."
Him being 35, the past 10 years would "come first" to when he was 18.
Either way i think we will try to get the information from as far back as possible, i guess the lesson here is more is better.

Thanks again for your quick response.

 

[Ironboy]

THANK YOU!!!

I just re-read the wording and it says "...since the age of 18, or the past 10 years, which ever comes first."
Him being 35, the past 10 years would "come first" to when he was 18.
Either way i think we will try to get the information from as far back as possible, i guess the lesson here is more is better.

Thanks again for your quick response.

Charlie is right, I believe. I have asked this question a few times, and it seems that it is from age 18.

 

[canadianwoman]

I just re-read the wording and it says "...since the age of 18, or the past 10 years, which ever comes first."
Him being 35, the past 10 years would "come first" to when he was 18.

But if you start when he was a baby and move forward, 18 comes first.
In any case, when people have submitted only the last 10 years and are over the age of 28, the visa officer will ask them to redo the form including everything from the age of 18. So just starting from 18 is the safest route.

 

[newlife23]

Sorry for hijacking, I am in my fifties, so some of the employers I work for in the seventies and eighties don't exist anymore but I am still listing them. There is 1 employer that I don't remember, how do I handle that? Do I fill in as "can't remember"?

 

[canadianwoman]

Fill in as much detail as you can, then attach a note explaining you have forgotten the name and have looked but can't find it. They should accept it. The important thing is to not leave any time unaccounted for.

 

[newlife23]

Thank you canadianwoman

 

[locolynn]

In any case, when people have submitted only the last 10 years and are over the age of 28, the visa officer will ask them to redo the form including everything from the age of 18.

Hi - do you know of specific instances when this occured?

The reason I ask is that I read it the other way - and it would never have occured to me to read it as provide all information from when you are 18. It would seem excessive to ask a 60 year old to provide 42 years of information. (My husband was less than 28 at the time so we just did from when he was 18).

If that is the case - why do they word it that way? It would seem to me that it would make the most sense to just write: Provide information from when you were 18 (an adult) . Under what circumstances would the 10 years mark apply - if you are minor? In which case, wouldn't the parents be required to fill out that information for the child?

This is such a common question - it seems so strange to me that CIC hasn't clarified it....



Lynn

 

[tink23]

They should probably make it say something like, "If you're 28years or more, provide information from the time you were 18 . If you're 27years or less, provide information from the previous 10 years."
I'm fairly certain that the applications are worded this way on purpose to make applicants confused and do something wrong. That way they can waste time on the app by sending it back or just reject the application based on the mistake made.

 

[locolynn]

If you're 27years or less, provide information from the previous 10 years."

See that's what doesn't make sense to me: so if you are applying and you are 21 years old they are going to want to know what you were doing when you were 11???? Come on that can't be right.

We filled it out from the time my husband was 18 (a legal adult in Canada) and he was 26 when we applied. They accepted that and has never been asked about the time from 16 to 18.

Has PMM, rjessome or other senior posters weighed in on this?

Lynn

 

[scylla]

See that's what doesn't make sense to me: so if you are applying and you are 21 years old they are going to want to know what you were doing when you were 11???? Come on that can't be right.

We filled it out from the time my husband was 18 (a legal adult in Canada) and he was 26 when we applied. They accepted that and has never been asked about the time from 16 to 18.

Has PMM, rjessome or other senior posters weighed in on this?

Lynn

That's correct. If you were applying as a 21 year old, they would want your history back to age 11.

 

[locolynn]

That's correct. If you were applying as a 21 year old, they would want your history back to age 11.

Not trying to stir up anything - but with what information are you confirming that?

Cuz seriously when I read it/read it(past tense) I didn't even question it. It made perfect sense to me:

"Provide details of your personal history since the age of 18, or the past ten years, whatever comes first. Start with your most recent activity."

So starting with the most recent activity of a 26 year old, I would hit 18 first...starting with the activities of a 45 year old, I would hit 35 first.

Like I said earlier, we filled ours out for a 26 year old just to 18. We haven't gotten our visa yet, but the Schedule A was never mentioned and he has never been asked about his activities between 16 and 18. Which would have been - going to school. Playing soccer and checking out girls - he was 16!!!

It would seem to me that it would kind of wierd to be asking people about stuff they did when they were a minor. What kind of information are they going to glean about you when you mention your personal history of going to school, playing with barbies and writing love notes to older boys who lived down the street (not that I know anyone who did that - lol).

Shoot if you commit a crime in the US or Canada as a minor - your records are sealed.

I'm just saying...

Lynn

 

[newlife23]

I hear you : And to go from month to month every year since 18 for a person in their fifties is so ridiculous!!!! Thats me How could I remember!!! I wonder if it is alright to put in rough estimate of the month and year. And this is the page I have most problems filling up.

 

[Aneyshar]

This issue has generated much debate, and to me it's because of the phrase "whichever comes first."

Notice that this phrase was not present in the older form at all (IMM 0008 1e Schedule 1 Background), which is the one I used before they moved to the new IMM 5669E.

Question 11 on the older form simply read "Provide the details of your personal history since the age of 18." The corresponding guide to IMM0008_1e_Schedule_1 had this for help:

"11. Personal history. - You must account for every month during the past 10 years or since the age of 18, whichever period is longer." (emphasis mine)

Now, I don't think the CIC would all of a sudden change the requirements just because of a vague sentence in a form. To me, it's still consistent with the older form. If you argue that it's silly to require an older person (e.g. 50 or older) to submit information that they may no longer remember, my answer would be, that's the way it's been all along, and that is how it was with the older form anyways! How, do you think, senior applicants who filed using the older form filled that question in?

Whatever way you choose to interpret the phrase in that question, it's obvious that CIC expects the applicant to provide as much detail as reasonable possible and available.

My advice to those that cannot either remember or access information that is long gone or forgotten is to simply include a statement indicating that the answers are accurate to the best of your knowledge.