You’re in Montreal too, right ? When did you apply ? Did you already take the exam and interview ?
RQ versus Physical Presence Questionnaires, including CIT 0205
- Thread starter dpenabill
- Start date
You’re in Montreal too, right ? When did you apply ? Did you already take the exam and interview ?
Winnipeg, exam taken on April 16, RQ the next day for my US travels, submitted required docs and was received on May 1, no update so far.
Sorry I can not follow you!
Passed the test Feb 2017 and officer handed me a Cit0171 then submitted all required documents in 3 months and since then am waiting
Passed the test Feb 2017 and officer handed me a Cit0171 then submitted all required documents in 3 months and since then am waiting
It may be time to consult with a lawyer.
The actual physical presence requirement for your application appears to be the 4 years in 6 requirement . . . requiring proof of physical presence for at least 1460 days during the six years immediately preceding the date you applied. You may want to revisit your physical presence to be sure that your documents show that you were in fact actually present in Canada at least 1460 days during the relevant six years. Note: if you fall ONE DAY SHORT of that requirement, you do NOT meet the requirements for this application. It can take a long time to be scheduled for a hearing with a Citizenship Judge. No point in waiting if in looking at your presence calculation you will fall one day or more short.
The current requirement is way more flexible. Just three years in five. Thus, unless you have moved out of Canada since making your previous application, the odds are very good you easily meet the current requirements. Yes, withdrawing the earlier application and re-applying will cost you more fees, but if you know you are one day or more short, that is what you will need to do anyway.
IN CONTRAST, if you are confident you met the 1460 days in six years requirement when you applied, and that the evidence you submitted adequately proves that, you can wait. How long that will take is unknown. We see very few reports here of citizenship cases going to a Citizenship Judge. It could take a long while more than it has already taken.
This application might not be headed for a hearing with a Citizenship Judge. It could still be in queue for a Physical Presence Determination by a Citizenship Officer. So it is possible you could be getting notice to attend the oath any time now.
But given how much time has passed, that tends to suggest your application is in queue for referral to a Citizenship Judge.
Overall: whether to wait or withdraw and reapply is a personal decision, for you to make, and that decision depends a lot on whether you are confident your current application and documents submitted in response to CIT 0171 sufficiently prove you were physically present in Canada at least 1460 days during the relevant six years.
If you took the test in February 2017, that was 4 months BEFORE Parliament adopted Bill C-6 (that was June 19, 2017) which contained the amendments to Section 5(1)(c) of the Citizenship Act that revised the actual physical presence requirement to be 3 out of 5 years, and that change did not take effect until October 11, 2017, more than seven months later than the date you report taking the test:
Perhaps there is a mistake in the date you reported here.
In any event, for any application made after June 11, 2015 and before October 11, 2017, the actual presence requirement is four out of six years, not 3 out of 5.
You also report that "its" been 23 months. 23 months ago is also BEFORE the October 11, 2017 date that the 3 out of 5 rule took effect. Further indicating an application made when the requirement was 4 out of 6 years. (Moreover, the way you presented this suggested 23 months since you submitted the response to RQ, the CIT 0171 . . . which further indicates an application made well before the 3/5 took effect.)
If you meant that it has ALMOST been 23 months since you applied, and you applied after October 10, 2017, and you meant you took the test in February 2018 or perhaps even February 2019, then the 3 out of 5 rule applies.
But that only changes a couple of things relative to my previous observations.
It changes the timeline. As I noted in my previous post:
This application might not be headed for a hearing with a Citizenship Judge. It could still be in queue for a Physical Presence Determination by a Citizenship Officer. So it is possible you could be getting notice to attend the oath any time now.
This possibility has a higher probability if in fact it has NOT yet been 23 months since RQ let alone the test or the date the application was made.
The actual date of the test matters too, a bit; that is assuming the reference to a February 2017 test date was in error, and assuming it was as to the year rather than month, whether you had the test in February 2018 or February 2019 . . . if you just had the test earlier this year and just responded to RQ a few months ago, that is well within common timeline for this sort of non-routine application. In contrast, if you had the test in February 2018 and submitted the response to RQ well over a year ago, that could indicate the application is in a queue to be referred to a Citizenship Judge (and perhaps time to see a lawyer).
But the probability all is still on track toward taking the oath somewhat soon depends more on whether you for-sure met the actual physical present requirement. That is the real question.
Which leads to the other thing that changes: the calculation of days. 1095 days actual presence within five years required rather than 1460 in six years . . . assuming, again, you made your application after October 10, 2017.
But that does not change the key question, which is whether you met that requirement or fall short (for whatever reason). So again, the question to ask is whether or not, in reviewing your presence calculation and the evidence you submitted, is whether you met the minimum 1095 days or you fell short.
In particular, what I said about meeting the requirement as to 4 out of 6 years also applies to the 3 out of 5 years requirement, except for the number of days involved. That is, if you fall short of 1095 days in five years, even by just one day, that would mean you were not qualified. Waiting for a Citizenship Officer to make a decision, or possibly waiting much longer for a hearing with a Citizenship Judge, would be a waste of time.
So the suggestion remains largely the same, if you review your presence calculation and it is apparent that you actually fell short, that you can only prove presence for 1094 or fewer days, it would still be better to withdraw the present application and re-apply (assuming you have continued to live in Canada). In contrast, if you are confident you had 1095 or more days credit, you can wait to see how it goes . . . and indeed, if your response to the RQ sufficiently supports your presence calculation and a total credit for more than 1095 days, a notice to attend an oath ceremony could be coming any day . . . recognizing, though, it could take a good while longer.
My mistake the test was Feb 2018,
I have more than 10 months extra in physical presence calculation but travel at least 10 times in 5 years period of application timeline. Officer told after the test that you travel many times! Thats why they should check my eligibility.
Last edited: