PR card renewal obligations

[armoured]

To state the obvious, this doesn't always work. My own personal case is one. I have a super common name, and you can find folks with my name all around the world. Meanwhile, I deliberately keep a low profile online and and avoid social media owned by the big companies etc. So someone trying this on me would have to work really hard to filter out a bunch of false positives/false matches only to come up empty in the end. But I'm perhaps unusual in this regard.

To state the obvious: I did not claim it always works. It is one method of many they may use to check/double-check cases which are otherwise fine, or borderline. I could speculate, but the usage may be more useful in one direction (finding contradictory information) than another (confirming info).

The point is not that they ALWAYS use it, nor that not finding someone (those w/o social media profiles) is a big deal. Just that it may complement other methods in useful ways some of the time.

More useful to them than getting 250 page 'books' of repetitive information.

On the other hand, I can think of some contrived exceptional cases where many proofs are required but the applicant is entirely honest and forthcoming. (For example, someone who had the misfortune to be kidnapped and smuggled out of Canada against their will - bypassing the usual entry/exit controls - repeatedly.)

I think we can dismiss as not really relevant the contrived and fantastical.

 

[abff08f4813c]

I think we can dismiss as not really relevant the contrived and fantastical.

You mean like this?

them .. getting 250 page 'books' of repetitive information.

I only suggested the OP submit five total pieces of evidence, which, we both now agree is more than necessary, but this number is also what the OP actually did submit and what you suggested as being within a reasonable amount of info (here, https://www.canadavisa.com/canada-i...card-renewal-obligations.873603/post-11096505 )

But this is getting quite off-topic. Simply put, I remain unconvinced for the time being on the very minor that there's a correlation between the amount of evidence required for an application with the credibility of that application's applicant and agree with you on virtually everything else.

(Of course, there's also a difference being the number of pieces of evidences actually required (which is usually 2) and that actually submitted (which is probably usually 2 but sometimes a few more like 5 in OP's case). But with the original line being "If your file is so bad you need 250+ pages, you have a credibility problem" I was thus focusing on the former. (For who and under what circumstances would 250+ pages of evidence ever be actually needed for a PR card renewal app???) If anything, I'd wager the latter (someone submitting waaaay more pieces than they actually need for it) is even less likely to constitute a credibility issue on the applicant's part. An otherwise credible applicant who has trouble reading or following instructions - say perhaps like myself - is a far better and more likely explanation for those cases. Now the application would still probably be delayed, and it's reasonable to consider it the applicant's fault for not following the instructions, but the delay isn't a credibility issue. Again, very minor and unimportant tangent - and I suppose the potential accusation against someone's credibility being something of a personal sore spot for me might also play into it here.)

To state the obvious: I did not claim it always works.

Agreed (and actually that's one reason why I added the "state the obvious disclaimer").

It is one method of many they may use to check/double-check cases which are otherwise fine, or borderline. I could speculate, but the usage may be more useful in one direction (finding contradictory information) than another (confirming info).

The point is not that they ALWAYS use it, nor that not finding someone (those w/o social media profiles) is a big deal. Just that it may complement other methods in useful ways some of the time.

Makes sense. Agreed.

 

[armoured]

You mean like this?

I only suggested the OP submit five total pieces of evidence ... (For who and under what circumstances would 250+ pages of evidence ever be actually needed for a PR card renewal app???)

It is not contrived. An example in a different thread - in the last few days - of someone submitting (an /urgent/ request!) with a 250 page pdf.

If anything, I'd wager the latter (someone submitting waaaay more pieces than they actually need for it) is even less likely to constitute a credibility issue on the applicant's part. An otherwise credible applicant who has trouble reading or following instructions - say perhaps like myself - is a far better and more likely explanation for those cases.

The question, I believe, is not what is a better explanation (debatable but I take your point) - it's what conclusions the examiner might make.

Which might be 'can't read instructions.' Might be 'overcompensating' (for what exactly? need to think about this...)

Now the application would still probably be delayed,

But almost certainly will be "I have better stuff to do in the thirty minutes left in my shift today, I can close four other files where the applicants aren't trying to bury me, and my boss* has his targets to meet, maybe I'll leave this hot mess for ... later." (Or other bureaucratic moves like 'pass this overgrown mess of a hot potato' and call it a non-standard app)

*Also what if the boss asks what in the Lord's name is actually IN this 250 page hot mess? Can I possibly summarize it when I've barely glanced it? Hard pass.

Anyway, you get my point: follow the instructions, even if they seem to leave doubt; if they still leave doubt, yep, still follow the instructions.