skhan123 said:
Recently one of my friend who originally applied in Oct 2104 and got RQ, took the test. After test, the officer had his RQ documents in front of her. She reviewed RQ documents with him and asked some questions. She took about 20-30 pages out of it, mainly tax returns, employment records and exit/entry passport pages and return rest of the RQ documents. She told him that she is satisfied with his application and he will get the oath invite within 2-3 weeks. Last week my friend got the oath letter.
My questions is: Is this the new RQ review procedure now? Any one else also experienced it i.e. RQ review at the time of test/interview?
This does appear to be different than earlier reports regarding the interview experience for most applicants given a pre-test RQ.
It makes sense to do this, at least for applicant's whose RQ has been preliminarily assessed in a pre-interview check process (which was the original plan in OB 407 but for some reason seemed to never get implemented this way . . . until this report)
and the examining CIC official (possibly a Citizenship Officer but I am not sure of that) is either largely satisfied or is leaning toward being satisfied depending on the response of the applicant during the interview.
This would not characterize how it goes for all pre-test RQ'd applicants. For many the RQ will have fully resolved any concerns, the interview could be just as perfunctory as it is for routine applicants, and they will proceed to the Oath in due course per that local office's standard operating practices. For many others, the response to the RQ will not resolve CIC's concerns and the case is destined for a more or less thorough residency case review, so beyond clarifying a few details in the interview, perhaps there is no reason to waste time engaging in a more in-depth interview; these cases will be headed for a longer wait after the test-interview.
And obviously, post-test RQs (including RQ issued at the test) are yet a separate group and more likely to be long-haul process residency cases (if particular documentation is likely to resolve the concern that arises, it is more like a CIT 0520 request will be issued rather than RQ).
Obviously it requires more than one second-hand report to conclude this does indeed indicate a new approach at CIC, but the report is appreciated since it does indicate the interview can be a more substantive interaction than previous reports indicated. Of course this could be particular to the local office, or even an exception for the specific case. . . . So for those interested in how the RQ processing is working now and going forward, hopefully more participants will report back how their interview went and whether it was at all similar to this one.
