I was unable to find a post or a thread discussing this matter.
Has any one received RQ or RQ-lite prior to getting invited for an interview and/or to complete a citizenship test?
Timeline is as follows:
AOR: December 2019
ECAS status: In process as of January 2020
CIT-0520 Request (RQ-lite): November 2020 - requesting only photocopies of passports via email
You should be able to read a lot about the various types of RQ-related requests IRCC can and has made, including some references to various types of pre-test RQ, if you go back through old pages in the other topic where you posted:
For those who have hired an immigration lawyer for citizenship application, at what stage of the application you decided to consult a lawyer, and why?
For several years pre-test versions of RQ were fairly common. In recent years we have seen fewer reports of pre-test RQ but overall there have been fewer reports of all versions of RQ or RQ-related requests.
There are many practical explanations for the decline in the number of applicants reporting RQ-related requests and RQ-related non-routine processing, a tangent I will not address other than to say there are sufficient ongoing reports to suggest what triggers RQ-related non-routine processing and the processing typically encountered in such cases PROBABLY has not changed much . . . so the older discussions should still be largely relevant.
Probably NO reason to read much into the timing, pre-test or otherwise. Especially now during what are assuredly different approaches to pre-test screening during this time in which IRCC is adjusting to Covid-19. (In particular, a guess, during this period in which person-to-person contact is very limited, my guess is that local offices have implemented increased pre-test screening overall, and perhaps have adopted somewhat stricter criteria in deciding when to make requests for additional documents or information from applicants.)
Moreover, limited requests for a few particular documents should NOT be cause for alarm or much worry, at any phase. Generally limited requests are focused on verification of certain details or elements of the application, and NOT about overt concerns as to the applicant's information or credibility, let alone outright suspicion. So, odds are there is little or nothing to worry about.
That said . . . from another post of yours:
I applied with 1103 days in total.
Only six times travelled overseas during the eligible period. None of them to the US.
From what I understood, this type of RQ would be considered an RQ-lite. But I couldn't tell the differences with other types of requests.
You applied within the range many forum participants suggest is a safe margin. I generally suggest a minimum MONTH margin, with consideration for waiting even longer for some applicants depending on their particular facts. Big subject. I believe there are extensive discussion about this in the back pages of the other topic titled "RQ versus Physical Presence Questionnaires, including CIT 0205" (which is a topic I started more than three years ago in an effort to consolidate information about the various types of RQ-related requests and processing applicants encounter).
If you got all your travel dates totally correct, then you especially should have NO reason to worry. Just follow the instructions in what was sent to you and then . . . well, WAIT. Almost everyone is waiting longer now for almost every action on their application, and while the flow of information is too sporadic to draw firm conclusions or make predictions about time lines, in general the applicant who encounters non-routine processing, and particularly RQ-related non-routine processing, can buckle up to WAIT. Probably going to take awhile. How long is a wild, wild guess.
If you made mistakes or there are omissions in what you reported in the calculation of actual physical presence, then you probably want to take a hard OBJECTIVE look at everything in your application. A mistake off by a day or two should not be a problem.
Typical minor mistake of this sort comes from applicants who do things like report exit date from Canada based on passport entry stamp upon arrival in another country, which can often be off by a day (red-eye flights, for example, where the actual date of exit is the day prior to the entry stamp into another country) or two days (relying on entry stamp can often be off by two days, for example, if there was a trans-Pacific flight).
If you have a mistake or mistakes that risk pulling your actual physical presence down by more than a week (to just barely 1096 or 1095 days), of course that will almost mandate that IRCC more carefully examine your case . . . recognizing that if an applicant loses days that count from the calculation of actual physical presence reducing the number to 1094, just one day short, that actually REQUIRES IRCC to deny the application. So the closer it gets to the possibility of that, the greater IRCC's obligation to screen more carefully to MAKE SURE the applicant met the 1095 days credit minimum.
It is difficult to generalize much about who or when an applicant should consider
lawyering-up. The vast majority of applicants have NO NEED for a lawyer's assistance. The majority of applicants issued a version of RQ-lite (any version other than the full-blown RQ-0171) have little or no need for a lawyer's assistance. Even those who made mistakes. (Well, we all make mistakes and almost all of us made some mistakes in our citizenship applications, and IRCC understands this and appropriately deals with the vagaries of human error.)
Mostly you just need to provide the documents requested and be prepared to WAIT.
Of course if you recognize there is some aspect of your application that could be problematic or trigger suspicions . . . or if you are not settled in and living in Canada since applying . . . those are factors which might suggest the prudence of at least consulting with a lawyer.
