Please share. What is considered an absolute residency proof for RQ?

[Intel]

I came across this case: http://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/71386/index.do

The CJ considered the OHIP history records as passive residency proof.

If all supporting documents sent for RQ are considered as passive proofs, then what is considered as an absolute proof?

 

[CIC1973]

I think the only absolute proof to them is to have literally a leash 24/7/365/5 years on all of us patient immigrants so that when it is fully extended, we would be still be within the Canadian borders.

cause think about it, if you have a house and paying payments, the judge might say prove to me that you were living in it not someone else. or if you provide bank statements, he would say prove to me that you were using the credit card not someone else. so it is pointless... One sure way to prove residency is to be literally in prison for 5 years in solitary confinement, but then that would not satisfy the number of days or look good in your application

I would not be surprised if 50 years from now, all immigrants would have to live in locked concentration camps with hard labor to satisfy their residence requirements

 

[vinaypuri]

Generally employment record s are considered best proof.

I came across this case: http://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/71386/index.do

The CJ considered the OHIP history records as passive residency proof.

If all supporting documents sent for RQ are considered as passive proofs, then what is considered as an absolute proof?

 

[meyakanor]

I can understand if the judges would consider, say, using Alberta or Saskatchewan health cards only as passive proofs. But OHIP card has your picture on it, and nobody else could have used it. I don't see why it wouldn't be considered a solid residential proof.

 

[moti]

"The Applicant notes that the documents submitted show a detailed and continuous history of employment, residence, taxes, and auto and health insurance in Canada."

there is proof of employment . the only thing is that number of days of physical presence are not 1095.

 

[rayman_m]

This case went to CJ because she applied less than 1095 days physical presence. If she would have been waited few days to complete 1095 days, things would have been different and she could have been a citizen by now..

 

[Intel]

This case went to CJ because she applied less than 1095 days physical presence. If she would have been waited few days to complete 1095 days, things would have been different and she could have been a citizen by now..

My point is not about meeting the physical presence requirement. It is about how to prove it when all the supporting documents are considered passive indicators. Even the employment records will not show how many physical days that the applicant has resided.

 

[springtime]

hi,
I think:
proof of employment, your bank account statement, your bills (phone,internet, hydro, rent, ... ), your study record.

If you haven't been unemployed, and being bus some how with work, study, volunteer job, 99.99% you will not get RQ.
They might ask for FP if you have a very popular name just to protect you.

good luck

 

[blueshirt]

did your employer ever did pre employment screening service through GARDA. if thats done it means you were screen by government and you have a good reason to prove your existence in canada.. RQ are never issued for small clarifications if they need they ask that through additional documentation. RQ is only issued if you falsely testify you completed 3 yrs eligibility and you didn't in real.

 

[Msafiri]

I came across this case: http://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/71386/index.do

The CJ considered the OHIP history records as passive residency proof.

If all supporting documents sent for RQ are considered as passive proofs, then what is considered as an absolute proof?

This was probably semantics in the sense that the OHIP history record was a small piece of evidence to the requirements - it seems to have had minimal entries. The applicant tried to get citizenship early by going with basic residence. This approach relies on

1. Getting a CJ that will be ok with applying a non physical presence residence test

2. CIC accepting decision in 1 which odds are slim to none (with slim where they miss the appeal window due to the volume of files and/or disorganization).

The law requires you to meet 1095 days out of 4 years - you already get a year to do your very important thing outside Canada why do you need any more time? If you need more time then hey re-apply when you are free. This is what CIC is pushing and the Federal Court is increasingly going with this....it mirrors what the general public wants and expects...it may suck but it makes a lot of sense to Joe Public!

In regards to your query - full time employment in a type of job that requires your actual physical presence at a bona fide well known employer that has credibility in the eyes of CIC based on employer standards and adherence to employment legislation - read you have a contract, you get paid, the job is real, the job is taxed and all these are recorded. So you are a bus driver working 40 hours a week for the City transit. The city won't make up a fake job with fake pay stubs for you as a friend or relative but hey if you are a consultant employed by some small family company that is constantly loss making to CRA despite sending you to Europe, Asia, ME every year for a couple of weeks on trade trips then CIC might want to dig a little bit deeper!

 

[rayman_m]

My point is not about meeting the physical presence requirement. It is about how to prove it when all the supporting documents are considered passive indicators. Even the employment records will not show how many physical days that the applicant has resided.

Credible proof will be if some one has a single passport carrying right from the date of entry to Canada as PR (entry stamped) and thereafter all travel's exit and entry stamps in passport from overseas airports and in Canada along with a CBSA record. These documents can't be reproduced/altered by 3rd person like as all other proof are being discussed above..

I know many applicants got their citizenship with little or no employment income/limited bank or other proofs, but they had solid passport entry/exit evidence which satisfied the officer and was not required to refer to a CJ. However, applying less then 1095 itself raises too many concerns and even all other genuine proof becomes 2ndary to the CJ.

 

[Intel]

Thanks, Msafiri, for you input and insights. Credible full-time employment should be a solid proof, only if the applicant has a full-time job history that covers the 4-year period.

Oh rayman_m! I know an applicant who has a single passport covering the relevant period, with all stamps translated and submitted at the interview, yet he was slammed with a post-test RQ despite meeting the physical presence. Moreover, applicants with multiple citizenship can use their passports to their advantage, specially if their names are presented differently in each passport they carry (http://news.gc.ca/web/article-en.do?nid=839179).

 

[Msafiri]

.......I know many applicants got their citizenship with little or no employment income/limited bank or other proofs, but they had solid passport entry/exit evidence which satisfied the officer and was not required to refer to a CJ. However, applying less then 1095 itself raises too many concerns and even all other genuine proof becomes 2ndary to the CJ.

1. Too many applicants have multiple passports and hide their travels - this has got more difficult with data sharing between border agencies as well as the use of pre-flight ID provision. CBSA/CBP/UKBA etc know you are en-route the minute the door to the plane you are taking has been locked.

2. Even with a single passport there are many countries out there where for the price of a big mac meal a border official will stamp any date of arrival/ departure that you require i.e backdate/ forward date. For this reason the job scenario in my prior post tends to trump any 'I have a no travel passport/ all stamped travel passport' but no employment/self employment - CIC doesn't release stats but it seems by a simple extrapolating of forum reports there is a significant number of 'homemakers' getting RQd each year.