Renewing PR card while living abroad
- Thread starter keesio
- Start date
Hi Guys, I moved to Canada in 2010 as permanent resident. I then moved to the US in 2013 to pursue post graduate training in medicine. My wife who is a Canadian citizen moved with me. My PR card is now expired. I am eligible for renewal however I cannot return to Canada for another 2 years until I complete my training. Can I renew my card from the United States? I have relatives in Canada whose address I can provide for mailing purposes. Has anyone successfully applied for a PR card from abroad?
If you have your relatives mail in your application for you or mail it yourself from inside Canada, they can't deny it based on that you are living abroad as long as your application originated in Canada and you are providing a Canadian mailing address for correspondance. They can however request that you pick your PR card up in person at your relatives town CIC office so if they do, you will have to go there to pick it up.doc7 said:
You should however note that right now, you still meet the RO having spent the past 2 years outside Canada but after 2 more years, you will not meet the RO anymore because you as a PR are only allowed up to 3 years outside Canada in any rolling 5 year period. Returning to Canada after 2 years would therefore be based on luck. If the immigration officers become aware that you don't meet the RO, they could report you for it and choosing to educate yourself outside Canada does not fall under humane and compassionate reasons that would be considered for that.
Caution:
(In reference to the use of someone else's address, a common response to queries about applying for a new PR card while living abroad, quoting just a couple among other similar posts commonly made in both this and other forums.)
CIC can, however, not only deny the application but initiate criminal prosecution and inadmissibility proceedings (leading to loss of PR status) for misrepresentations in the application.
While many, many PRs do indeed do something of this sort, using another person's address in the PR card application in order to obtain a new/renewed PR card, the current application (since earlier this year) makes it difficult to do so without fudging at least some of the information the PR must provide.
Key among problems in doing this is Item 12 in the application, which requires the PR to enter the PR's current residential address in Canada.
It is one thing to declare a mailing address using someone else's address (trusted friend or relative), another thing to misrepresent one's actual residential address, that is, the address at which one primarily resides.
I would suggest that playing games like staying at the address for a visit during which the application is mailed, and listing it as one's residential address, may work but for the PR living abroad it will be well apparent to CIC that the PR is playing games if all the other sections in the application are truthfully completed . . . and if not, that's misrepresentation.
It is not at all necessary for a PR living in the U.S. with a Canadian citizen spouse to obtain a new PR card unless and until actually returning to live in Canada.
The only inconvenience is relative to flying to Canada for visits.
It is not worth playing games with CIC, let alone taking the risk of making any outright misrepresentation in an application to CIC.
Observation regarding trend generally:
It is worth noting that for several years there has been a consistent trend for CIC to not only more strictly and aggressively enforce PR obligations (and thus the experiences of PRs in the past are not reliable indicators of how CIC is currently approaching PRs), but to more strictly interpret the applicable statutes and regulations and to amend and supplement the regulations toward this end. Statutory amendments to the IRPA have also been made.
Note for example that just a month ago, June 10, 2015, new regulations came into effect dramatically expanding the information CIC can collect and SHARE with other government bodies . . . and in what has been typical of this government, notice of this was not public until three weeks AFTER the new regulatory provisions were registered and came into force.
Perhaps the most salient example of how CIC's approach has dramatically changed in recent years is its interpretation and application of the exception for PRs employed by a Canadian business abroad. With no changes to the statute or the applicable regulation itself, in the last three to four years CIC has adopted a substantially more draconian interpretation of who is entitled to credit toward the PR Residency Obligation based on being employed by a Canadian business abroad. This has been discussed and illuminated in depth in other topics, but among the most salient aspects of the change has been the requirement that the assignment abroad be temporary. This is just one example of the evolution of CIC's approach to PRs.
Relative to the particular subject of this topic, there were multiple Operational Bulletins issued in the 2012 to 2014 period related to CIC's efforts to further discourage aplications for new PR cards by PRs living abroad, including at least one OB which was only posted publicly briefly then pulled from the publicly displayed OBs (still accessible, however, with some significant redactions, via ATI requests). Some of CIC's efforts in this direction have been curbed by Federal Court decisions (such as those affirming that the fact the PR is abroad is not a stand-alone ground for denying the application for a new PR card), but CIC has nonetheless continued to implement practices and policies to effectively (within practical parameters) require PRs abroad to rely on PR Travel Documents for travel to Canada and otherwise to discourage or limit the capacity of PRs abroad to obtain new PR cards until and unless they actually return to live in Canada.
The point of this is that many posts in this and other forums reflect historical experiences, which in many respects are not indicative of current practices. And are even less indicative of what future practices are likely to be.
I recognize that my perception about the trends is not shared by many, or for some the trends are not seen to be as significant, as problematic as I portray. That is, I recognize there is a difference of opinion about many aspects of what I outline above. So sure, I offer this for-what-it-is-worth. In this regard, however, it warrants repeating and emphasizing that it is not worth playing games with CIC just to obtain a new PR card for anyone whose PR status is not at risk. I use the phrase "playing games" deliberately, recognizing the extent to which certain elements involve technicalities which can be manipulated with rationalization, to caution that there is no need to go there and take risks about how CIC will perceive things.
(In reference to the use of someone else's address, a common response to queries about applying for a new PR card while living abroad, quoting just a couple among other similar posts commonly made in both this and other forums.)
CIC can, however, not only deny the application but initiate criminal prosecution and inadmissibility proceedings (leading to loss of PR status) for misrepresentations in the application.
While many, many PRs do indeed do something of this sort, using another person's address in the PR card application in order to obtain a new/renewed PR card, the current application (since earlier this year) makes it difficult to do so without fudging at least some of the information the PR must provide.
Key among problems in doing this is Item 12 in the application, which requires the PR to enter the PR's current residential address in Canada.
It is one thing to declare a mailing address using someone else's address (trusted friend or relative), another thing to misrepresent one's actual residential address, that is, the address at which one primarily resides.
I would suggest that playing games like staying at the address for a visit during which the application is mailed, and listing it as one's residential address, may work but for the PR living abroad it will be well apparent to CIC that the PR is playing games if all the other sections in the application are truthfully completed . . . and if not, that's misrepresentation.
It is not at all necessary for a PR living in the U.S. with a Canadian citizen spouse to obtain a new PR card unless and until actually returning to live in Canada.
The only inconvenience is relative to flying to Canada for visits.
It is not worth playing games with CIC, let alone taking the risk of making any outright misrepresentation in an application to CIC.
Observation regarding trend generally:
It is worth noting that for several years there has been a consistent trend for CIC to not only more strictly and aggressively enforce PR obligations (and thus the experiences of PRs in the past are not reliable indicators of how CIC is currently approaching PRs), but to more strictly interpret the applicable statutes and regulations and to amend and supplement the regulations toward this end. Statutory amendments to the IRPA have also been made.
Note for example that just a month ago, June 10, 2015, new regulations came into effect dramatically expanding the information CIC can collect and SHARE with other government bodies . . . and in what has been typical of this government, notice of this was not public until three weeks AFTER the new regulatory provisions were registered and came into force.
Perhaps the most salient example of how CIC's approach has dramatically changed in recent years is its interpretation and application of the exception for PRs employed by a Canadian business abroad. With no changes to the statute or the applicable regulation itself, in the last three to four years CIC has adopted a substantially more draconian interpretation of who is entitled to credit toward the PR Residency Obligation based on being employed by a Canadian business abroad. This has been discussed and illuminated in depth in other topics, but among the most salient aspects of the change has been the requirement that the assignment abroad be temporary. This is just one example of the evolution of CIC's approach to PRs.
Relative to the particular subject of this topic, there were multiple Operational Bulletins issued in the 2012 to 2014 period related to CIC's efforts to further discourage aplications for new PR cards by PRs living abroad, including at least one OB which was only posted publicly briefly then pulled from the publicly displayed OBs (still accessible, however, with some significant redactions, via ATI requests). Some of CIC's efforts in this direction have been curbed by Federal Court decisions (such as those affirming that the fact the PR is abroad is not a stand-alone ground for denying the application for a new PR card), but CIC has nonetheless continued to implement practices and policies to effectively (within practical parameters) require PRs abroad to rely on PR Travel Documents for travel to Canada and otherwise to discourage or limit the capacity of PRs abroad to obtain new PR cards until and unless they actually return to live in Canada.
The point of this is that many posts in this and other forums reflect historical experiences, which in many respects are not indicative of current practices. And are even less indicative of what future practices are likely to be.
I recognize that my perception about the trends is not shared by many, or for some the trends are not seen to be as significant, as problematic as I portray. That is, I recognize there is a difference of opinion about many aspects of what I outline above. So sure, I offer this for-what-it-is-worth. In this regard, however, it warrants repeating and emphasizing that it is not worth playing games with CIC just to obtain a new PR card for anyone whose PR status is not at risk. I use the phrase "playing games" deliberately, recognizing the extent to which certain elements involve technicalities which can be manipulated with rationalization, to caution that there is no need to go there and take risks about how CIC will perceive things.
There is no reason to lie about your residential address. You can be fully truthful about living outside Canada but give a Canadian mailing address in your application and write in a cover letter that this is the address of your relatives.
Various sources on the CIC website state that you should be in Canada in order to apply to renew your PR card. However, other sources state that you can not be refused a PR card simply because you are located outside Canada as long as you meet the RO. The application must originate within Canada. Some have been denied because they mailed it from another country. CIC can make you pick up the PR card in person. That's pretty much it.
You can read about this in ENF 27:
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/manuals/enf/enf27-eng.pdf - section 5.2 - page 13
Various sources on the CIC website state that you should be in Canada in order to apply to renew your PR card. However, other sources state that you can not be refused a PR card simply because you are located outside Canada as long as you meet the RO. The application must originate within Canada. Some have been denied because they mailed it from another country. CIC can make you pick up the PR card in person. That's pretty much it.
You can read about this in ENF 27:
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/manuals/enf/enf27-eng.pdf - section 5.2 - page 13
The new PR card renewal guide post-dates the ENF-27, implying that the requirements have mutated.
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/information/applications/guides/5445ETOC.asp#5445E4 makes it clear that it must be the applicants residential address, and states that if one is not provided, processing will be delayed until one is provided. It goes as far as differentiating residential from mailing addresses. The intent is obvious.
I have noticed that many of the publicly visible Operational Manuals are now obsolete or missing significant updates. I certainly wouldn't rely on many of them as representing current operating practice.
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/information/applications/guides/5445ETOC.asp#5445E4 makes it clear that it must be the applicants residential address, and states that if one is not provided, processing will be delayed until one is provided. It goes as far as differentiating residential from mailing addresses. The intent is obvious.
I have noticed that many of the publicly visible Operational Manuals are now obsolete or missing significant updates. I certainly wouldn't rely on many of them as representing current operating practice.
zardoz makes an important point, plus, it is worth noting, in many respects the Operational Manuals are not being updated. CIC is, instead, replacing them with Program Delivery Instructions. In the meantime, in many respects there is a gap between the Operational Manuals and the dissemination of updates to the Program Delivery Instructions.
No crystal ball is required to foresee that leaving this section blank or putting "N/A" in it will result in the application being returned as incomplete.
If the PR's true place of residence is abroad, to put a brother's address, parent's address, or friend's address in response to Item 12 would be misrepresentation . . . or, at the least, playing games. My caution is to not go there. There is no compelling need for the PR card which warrants risking the potential consequences.
That leaves the option of putting in a foreign address in response to Item 12. I cannot say I have seen anyone report doing this. I do not know what CIC will do with this for sure. It would be non-responsive, so I suspect it will result in the application being returned as incomplete or returned as not having been made in Canada (even if the applicant is in Canada and sends it from Canada when made). I am not sure.
My sense is the form was changed to include specific reference to residential address in Canada precisely to accomplish this.
Those in this situation could try putting in their foreign address and seeing what happens.
My caution was to avoid making any misrepresentation in the application, including as to either address history or current residential address at the time of applying.
The question this does not respond to is how the applicant answers Item 12 in the current application, which explicitly requires the PR to report his or her residential address IN CANADA.Leon said:
No crystal ball is required to foresee that leaving this section blank or putting "N/A" in it will result in the application being returned as incomplete.
If the PR's true place of residence is abroad, to put a brother's address, parent's address, or friend's address in response to Item 12 would be misrepresentation . . . or, at the least, playing games. My caution is to not go there. There is no compelling need for the PR card which warrants risking the potential consequences.
That leaves the option of putting in a foreign address in response to Item 12. I cannot say I have seen anyone report doing this. I do not know what CIC will do with this for sure. It would be non-responsive, so I suspect it will result in the application being returned as incomplete or returned as not having been made in Canada (even if the applicant is in Canada and sends it from Canada when made). I am not sure.
My sense is the form was changed to include specific reference to residential address in Canada precisely to accomplish this.
Those in this situation could try putting in their foreign address and seeing what happens.
My caution was to avoid making any misrepresentation in the application, including as to either address history or current residential address at the time of applying.
The renewal form has asked for your residential address in Canada since 2002. If you look for the form on different websites, you can find some old versions to verify that.
In any case, as said, somebody who doesn't live in Canada doesn't actually need to renew their PR card although it may help with travel if they are not visa exempt.
However, if I was in this situation, I'd certainly give it a try because even in the instructions, it does not clearly say that they will refuse to renew your PR card if you currently do not live in Canada. If they want to make that a policy, I am sure they will add that to the guide. Maybe they are planning to do that. We'll see if some people start getting refused.
If I were in that situation, I'd strike through "in Canada" on the form and write my residential address in another country.
The ENF 27 was updated at the end of 2014. OP 10 was updated in January 2015 and the PR renewal form in February. OP 10 has this to say about the issue:
In any case, as said, somebody who doesn't live in Canada doesn't actually need to renew their PR card although it may help with travel if they are not visa exempt.
However, if I was in this situation, I'd certainly give it a try because even in the instructions, it does not clearly say that they will refuse to renew your PR card if you currently do not live in Canada. If they want to make that a policy, I am sure they will add that to the guide. Maybe they are planning to do that. We'll see if some people start getting refused.
If I were in that situation, I'd strike through "in Canada" on the form and write my residential address in another country.
The ENF 27 was updated at the end of 2014. OP 10 was updated in January 2015 and the PR renewal form in February. OP 10 has this to say about the issue:
So whether they allow it or don't allow it, two operational manuals says you can and nowhere does it say that you can't. That would be worth a try for me.
Ultimately the legal position should close off any ambiguity but it could be argued it creates more. The IRPA regulations state that
56 (2) An application for a permanent resident card must be made in Canada and include.....
It doesn't say the presumptive PR applicant must be physically in Canada. A clear example of this is where the PR residing outside Canada decides to use the service of a legal representative to handle the application. They courier the application to the lawyer who couriers it to Sidney. For the residential address in Canada just write N/A or to cover this angle off 'residing in country X' - nothing wrong with this and its not misrepresentation. The exceptions to the physical requirement to meet the RO (especially the accompanying citizen clause) means CIC will have a hard time trying to get the applicants to physically be in Canada for the application - Parliament would have to legislate this....think of all those pi**ed off Citizens with an accompanying spouse who have a vote eh!!!
56 (2) An application for a permanent resident card must be made in Canada and include.....
It doesn't say the presumptive PR applicant must be physically in Canada. A clear example of this is where the PR residing outside Canada decides to use the service of a legal representative to handle the application. They courier the application to the lawyer who couriers it to Sidney. For the residential address in Canada just write N/A or to cover this angle off 'residing in country X' - nothing wrong with this and its not misrepresentation. The exceptions to the physical requirement to meet the RO (especially the accompanying citizen clause) means CIC will have a hard time trying to get the applicants to physically be in Canada for the application - Parliament would have to legislate this....think of all those pi**ed off Citizens with an accompanying spouse who have a vote eh!!!