Should I send credit card statements of all 36 months with the citizenship form

[Juney]

the requirement checklist is up there as a guide.

 

[rayman_m]

In my opinion, one can include only all pages of passport colour copies with stamps. Sending all pages is not considered as exaggeration rather it helps to determine travel history which is a no-1 proof in terms of residency. 2nd most vital proof is work documents like NOA/T4 and to be submitted with application. Rest is totally un-wanted..

 

[era1521]

In my opinion, one can include only all pages of passport colour copies with stamps. Sending all pages is not considered as exaggeration rather it helps to determine travel history which is a no-1 proof in terms of residency. 2nd most vital proof is work documents like NOA/T4 and to be submitted with application. Rest is totally un-wanted..

Why you should prove your residency with initial application? Who is asking you to prove the residency and initial stage?

 

[jrjayl]

Why you should prove your residency with initial application? Who is asking you to prove the residency and initial stage?

Some "think" that'll help reduce the chance of getting an RQ.
But really, the unsubstantiated assumption here is that "the more detail provided in initial application, the less chance an RQ will be issued".
Again, except CIC, no one really knows how they work, wrt RQ. In order to answer your question, a CIC officer is the best candidate.

Lastly, we are all here to give our experience and hopefully it will help someone.
None of us is a professional immigration lawyer (if someone here is, I take it back), whether adopting comments posted here or not, is a fully personal decision.
Yet, I personally benefit a lot from people's comments in this forum.

 

[dpenabill]

the requirement checklist is up there as a guide.

Not really. It is more definitive than a "guide."

The application checklist is mandatory and exhaustively prescribes what documents are to be included with the application. Failure to include listed documents (other than those not applicable to the individual) will result in the return of the application as incomplete.

There is not the slightest hint in the instructions, in the guide, or in the checklist either, that an applicant should include any documents other than those specified.

So, how do you define "some"?

" . . . how do you define "some"?"

Usually (with some variations relative to context): A significant number but far less than exhaustively, and relative to a percentages context, significantly less than a majority.

Thus, for example, where I make reference to "some" applicants who included additional documents, that is an accurate reflection (I am quite sure) that most applicants follow the checklist and do not submit extra documents, but there have been a significant number who (like me) did.

Where I make reference to including "some" additional documents, similarly (and obviously I thought, this language not being at all obscure) that reflects the inclusion of a number of documents but far less than all those documents a person might think relevant to proving residency (let alone the vast range of peripheral documents like bank or credit card statements). Additionally, in this context I think "some" aptly suggests a relatively small number.

Not sure why you found that confusing.

Where you draw the line on what is "good enough"?
And then, if "doubt they helped" with "I know they did not hurt" thats a pretty contradicting statement.
Whats the point of considering it in the first place?

. . . . .

What motivated you to include that "some" additional documentation after carefully weighting .... what did you weight?
Have you thought you'll fence the RQ? Did you believe your application will be faster? And if it was not faster what was the issue as long as we all presume we here to live, die and get buried on Canadian soil. Why else would we need the citizenship, right?

No idea what line you are referring to as "good enough." Good enough for what?

There is no contradiction in doubting whether the inclusion of NoAs with my application helped (which is to say I think my application would have progressed the same as it did even if I had not included them) and concluding they did not hurt. I know they did not hurt because I was scheduled for the oath as quickly as anyone living where I do could have been. For it to have been any faster, CIC would have had to process my application in less than four months (we only get two or three ceremonies here a year, at the most) from receipt to oath, when at the time the fastest timelines being reported (including by others at my ceremony) were six to seven months.

I never thought (and still do not think) that including any extra documents can accelerate routine processing timelines.

There is only speculation about whether or not the inclusion of additional documents can help avoid RQ. But in this regard I have tried to make clear an important distinction:

Proof of residency will not avoid RQ because the decision about whether to issue RQ is based not on an assessment of residency itself, but is based on whether CIC identifies (in the application or applicant) a reason to question residency.

The distinction may seem subtle or even minimal to some, but it is an important one. If there is a factor that triggers RQ, it triggers RQ, and a ton of proof of residency included in the application will not change that. As others have also pointed out: it is not the job of the person doing the triage screening to review the content of additional documents, or to even draw conclusions about the applicant's residency, other than to look at specific criteria to identify whether, based on that specific criteria, it is CIC's policy to question-residency, that is, to issue RQ.


Thus, the real question, for anyone contemplating including extra documents, is whether or not they believe those documents can, somehow, make a difference in the triage screening for reasons to question residency.

Most indications (including, in particular, based on a number of internal CIC memos about the triage criteria and their application, going back to 2012 and early 2013) are that it is not likely that additional documents will influence the triage screening.

That said, by the spring of 2013 (in the months preceding when I applied) it was also indicated that CIC had clarified the interpretation and application of some of the criteria (last specific copy of the triage criteria I have seen was from a File Requirements Checklist dated summer of 2012), and modified some of the triage criteria. In particular, there were indications that what had been more or less on / off criteria had either been eliminated (I doubted that) or modified to include some contextual assessment.

For me, the key criteria was self-employment. As of 2012, self-employment and any travel outside Canada triggered RQ. Period. Applicants who were self-employed and who had any travel outside Canada were all issued RQ.

By the spring of 2013 there were signs that this factor was no longer being so rigidly applied. CIC does not, however, publicly reveal how it applies its investigatory tools, like the triage criteria (and it attempts to keep the triage criteria itself out of the public domain . . . the 2012 File Requirements Checklist disclosure appears to have been due to an oversight in a local office).

For me, the question was, foremost, will including NoAs raise any flags, risk elevated or unwanted curiosity? At the time CIC was requesting NoAs for PR card renewal applications. Including NoAs for four years meant including just 8 or 10 pages of documents (I forget the exact number). I calculated the risk of raising a flag including them was very low.

The second question was whether or not the NoAs might affect the context in which my self-employment factor was considered in the screening based on the triage criteria. I did not think the chances were good that my NoAs would make the difference, but I also thought it was possible they might.

Comparing the risk to the possible benefit I elected to include them. I doubt they made a difference. They might have. I cannot say for sure.

That is to say, I included some (ten pages at most) extra documents with the hope that if the person doing the triage screening had discretion to issue or not issue RQ based on my self-employment, the NoAs might tip the scales toward not issuing RQ. This was a small hope, pursued I felt at low risk.

I think the above illustrates just how personal this decision-making would typically be for any given individual.

By the way, I doubt it made a difference because I believe that the individual doing the triage screening is focused on specific information in the application and GCMS and FOSS, with perhaps access to the CBSA travel history included. Which is to say I doubt that individual looks at the content of any additional documents. In contrast, though, I suspect that including a huge pile of additional documents will, in itself, draw the sort of attention that readily lends itself to questions, without looking into the content of the documents themselves.

Why should we recommend here what documents and how much to send with initial application, when is a checklist and guideline in place?

My opinion: We should not.

Personally I cringe whenever there are recommendations beyond the most obvious, certain ones.

The obvious and certain recommendations are OK, like the recommendation to submit a residency calculation with the application, or "do not leave any gaps" in either the address or employment history, or "be complete and accurate." Or my favourite: "follow the instructions." More to the point for this topic: "use the checklist to determine which documents to include with the application" (in conjunction with the "gather documents" instructions in the guide).

Generally I do not think we should be making recommendations in the nature of advising individuals what to do in a particular case. I may be sloppy sometimes, in effect making a recommendation, but I usually try to couch my observations and comments in language making it apparent I am not offering personal advice, but rather offering what I can to illuminate what we know about how things work, what we infer about these things, and what we can reasonably guess, with some emphasis on also identifying what is unknown. Applying those observations to a particular case is for the individual to do, based on that individual's best judgement in consideration of all the facts and circumstances relevant to that individual's case.

This particular topic, however, explicitly illustrates an occasion warranting a definite, declarative answer, which of course amounts to making a recommendation. As I said above:

The query here has a simple, certain answer: NO!

No! Do not dump three years worth of credit card statements in with the application.

 

[wilbur]

Will it be wise to send all the credit card statements with the citizenship file has any one done that ?

Kindly if any one could reply

It would not be wise or necessary at all... follow the guide and the checklist, any "additional" documents are not needed.

 

[asaif]

Honestly, if I had a chance to work with the CIC in another life I'll send RQs to anyone submitting extra residency proofs, just to punish them for not following the instructions and trying to outsmart me

 

[wilbur]

Honestly, if I had a chance to work with the CIC in another life I'll send RQs to anyone submitting extra residency proofs, just to punish them for not following the instructions and trying to outsmart me

+100

I would do the same!! There is a checklist for a reason.

 

[fwakeel]

+100

I would do the same!! There is a checklist for a reason.

sometimes less is more, give them exactly what they want (as per of the checklist) and let them do their job...

 

[rayman_m]

Why you should prove your residency with initial application? Who is asking you to prove the residency and initial stage?

I think you having difficulties to understand one's quote/opinion. You should know granting citizenship is related to the residency prove. If you have read my post carefully will find I am not in a favour of attaching large volume of additional documents other than checklist. In my opinion an applicant may submit all copies of passport along with bio pages if they have nos. of overseas travel. I never heard an applicant got RQ just for sending all pages of passport. NOA/T4 is no longer treated as an additional documents rather these are key proof of work documents which is required to submit with application from April 2014.

RQ triggers for many unknown reasons. For instance, while CIC officer assess an applicant at initial stages, they look at applicant's overall situation that includes age, background, family ties, residence/address consistency, work ties and most importantly passport history including overseas travels. If officer feels there is an issue in terms of residency prove, they may incline to issue RQ at pre-test stage. It is also known that many applicants received in past or even receiving RQ at present even there is no issues in their files and they never left Canada..

 

[era1521]

I think you having difficulties to understand one's quote/opinion. You should know granting citizenship is related to the residency prove. If you have read my post carefully will find I am not in a favour of attaching large volume of additional documents other than checklist. In my opinion an applicant may submit all copies of passport along with bio pages if they have nos. of overseas travel. I never heard an applicant got RQ just for sending all pages of passport. NOA/T4 is no longer treated as an additional documents rather these are key proof of work documents which is required to submit with application from April 2014.

RQ triggers for many unknown reasons. For instance, while CIC officer assess an applicant at initial stages, they look at applicant's overall situation that includes age, background, family ties, residence/address consistency, work ties and most importantly passport history including overseas travels. If officer feels there is an issue in terms of residency prove, they may incline to issue RQ at pre-test stage. It is also known that many applicants received in past or even receiving RQ at present even there is no issues in their files and they never left Canada..

Of course I have difficulties understanding one's quote/opinion when is in regard with something off the subject. My wonder was pretty simple; why a citizenship applicant needs to come forward to prove the residency by sending additional documents with initial application and not letting CIC decide if only the forms and residency calculator is enough on that.

Your information is obsolete; starting Oct 2014 no need to include work records with application. It wasnt mandatory even before (I myself applied in Sept 2014 and did not include any work records).

I can tell you from my personal experience as I had two applications, first one denied for residency concerns in 2006 and second granted and completed two weeks ago in less than 5 mts, and for second application i did not include a single piece of extra document nor I was asked to produce.

 

[Politren]

I also have an impression that sending extra documents with the initial application can only create problems.

 

[Paco]

I also have an impression that sending extra documents with the initial application can only create problems.

+1