Travelling back and forth to third countries while in Canada on a TRV

[sokosan]

This issue has probably been raised before but I cannot find it (I've looked through some past threads).

My girlfriend is currently in Canada on a TRV, she was granted the standard 6 months entry (October - April).

The original plan is that she would apply for an extension after 5 months to stay longer (I have to be in Canada for about a year, and she wants to stay with me as long as possible). I know that those applications take typically a few months to process, during which time she would have implied status, so even if the application is rejected she can stay probably for at least 7-8 months, maybe 9.

We are wondering whether, instead, it is smart to do any travelling to third countries during her stay here. E.g. we would go to the USA or South America for 10 days or 2 weeks or whatever and then come back to Canada (she has a multiple-entry TRV valid until 2019).

When she first got here she indicated she would stay for about a month - that's what she indicated on her visa application as well - and she had a ticket for such a stay - since she wasn't sure whether she would actually try to stay longer, as she's never been to Canada before and she cannot work as the TRV was the only option for her. Also we were not sure how long they would actually allow her to stay, but now after being granted the 6 months and spending some time here she decided she would like to stay with me as long as possible (as I outlined above).

So I have two questions:

1) Travelling to the USA: I read that if you have a single entry Canadian visa, and are authorized for a stay of X days, you can actually travel to the USA and back (as long as you go straight to the USA and back directly without transiting in any way through any third country and stay only in the USA during this time), but this counts towards your X days in Canada. For example, if you came in on a single-entry visa on June 1st and were allowed to stay until August 30th, you can go between the US and Canada but you still must leave Canada permanently on August 30th, i.e. this is when your visa expires.

What I haven't been able to figure out is - does the same apply for multiple-entry TRVs? She is now allowed to stay until April. If she goes to the US in say February for 15 days, and tries to come back to Canada, will she be
a) almost "automatically" readmitted with the same date she had to leave by as before (April), or
b) this counts as a completely "new" entry, i.e. now the border official can give her a "fresh" 6 months, can let her stay until April as she was allowed originally, or can even make it shorter (i.e. make her leave by March say)?

2) Travelling to other countries: this relates then to b) above. In your experience, how do you think the border official will react if after 3-4 months in Canada (although it was originally supposed to be 1) she goes to e.g. Bolivia (NOT her country of origin or residence!) for a few weeks, and then tries to come back to Canada? I'm guessing she would most likely be allowed in, but what is most likely? Being given a fresh 6 months or being limited to whatever date is on your current return ticket (in her case April)? Or even shorter?

I am guessing that if she were to wait for the 6 months to expire, and then go travel somewhere, and then try to come back, that it would look suspicious (i.e. trying to "artificially" extend her stay in Canada beyond the max. 6 months without applying for an extension), but if she travels say 3 months after first entering Canada, it doesn't look that way so much.

Or is it just wisest for her not to go anywhere until she just uses her maximum amount of time she can "squeeze" out here, and then just go back home?

Thanks a lot.

 

[Jalex23]

This issue has probably been raised before but I cannot find it (I've looked through some past threads).

There are tons of threads about this.

does the same apply for multiple-entry TRVs?

Yes.

a) almost "automatically" readmitted with the same date she had to leave by as before (April), or
b) this counts as a completely "new" entry, i.e. now the border official can give her a "fresh" 6 months, can let her stay until April as she was allowed originally, or can even make it shorter (i.e. make her leave by March say)?

No one can tell. Both cases can happen. I have seen both.

2) Travelling to other countries: this relates then to b) above. In your experience, how do you think the border official will react if after 3-4 months in Canada (although it was originally supposed to be 1) she goes to e.g. Bolivia (NOT her country of origin or residence!) for a few weeks, and then tries to come back to Canada? I'm guessing she would most likely be allowed in, but what is most likely? Being given a fresh 6 months or being limited to whatever date is on your current return ticket (in her case April)? Or even shorter?

I am guessing that if she were to wait for the 6 months to expire, and then go travel somewhere, and then try to come back, that it would look suspicious (i.e. trying to "artificially" extend her stay in Canada beyond the max. 6 months without applying for an extension), but if she travels say 3 months after first entering Canada, it doesn't look that way so much.

There is no such thing as "more likely". It is a case to case thing and even it depends on the CBSA officer that assess her entry.

Experience dictates that you should stay out of Canada at least the same amount of time you stay in.... but you can find people literally flag poling having no issue... and others that have been of Canada for longer but are given a very tough time. Some are given enough time to book a flight and leave, others a few months, others are refused, others go through smoothly....

Or is it just wisest for her not to go anywhere until she just uses her maximum amount of time she can "squeeze" out here, and then just go back home?

If the trip is not needed then it is better to "max out" the stay.

In your case I would not risk it. She has no business in Canada but being with you and that is a clear red flag for abuse on the visitor terms.

 

[sokosan]

Thanks a lot for your reply.

So basically it's just a lottery.

 

[sokosan]

In your case I would not risk it. She has no business in Canada but being with you and that is a clear red flag for abuse on the visitor terms.

Hi,

this sentence stuck in my mind so I just have to ask:

why is "having no business in Canada but being with me" a "clear abuse of visitor terms"? I mean why would that be a red flag.

You can stay in Canada as a visitor for the amount of time granted to you at the border. You can apply for an extension. This is all legal.

From my perspective "abuse of visitor terms" would be doing something illegal, something visitors are not allowed to do, like working or staying longer than allowed. Why is not being with one's boyfriend while respecting all the visitor terms (i.e. not overstaying, not doing anything illegal) not a legitimate reason for a visit?

Don't get me wrong I'm not taking a shot at you or anything, you obviously know a lot more about this than I do, I am just wondering why a border official would think that a girlfriend spending some months with her boyfriend in Canada is an "abuse of visitor terms". Thanks

 

[scylla]

You are not allowed to live in Canada on a visitor visa. When someone starts spending more time in Canada than outside of Canada in any given year, this can be perceived by border officials as an abuse of the visitor visa priviledge which is only supposed to be used for TEMPORARY stays. If somone wants to live in Canada, they need to obtain a visa that allows the to do so.

I agree that you should limit visits outside of Canada as much as possible if you want your girlfriend to be able to stay for the whole period. Traveling in and out of Canada repeatedly for short visits to third countries is not the behaviour of a visitor to Canada - it's the behaviour of someone who is living in Canada. This is the sort of thing that can make border officials unhappy and that can result in issues re-entering Canada.

 

[Jalex23]

From my perspective "abuse of visitor terms" would be doing something illegal, something visitors are not allowed to do, like working or staying longer than allowed. Why is not being with one's boyfriend while respecting all the visitor terms (i.e. not overstaying, not doing anything illegal) not a legitimate reason for a visit?

A visitor is supposed to be someone that comes and stays for a short period of time and after the visit leaves.

True, in your case you are not violating the law.... but you are violating the "spirit of the law" by living in Canada under a visitor status. That is called an abuse. Abuses are legal, but it is just taking advantage of terms and conditions. This is something Canada doesn't like as in here "good faith" is the norm and "good faith" can't work if people are trying to take advantage of norms as long as "they are not doing something illegal".

That grey area is where you are moving.... and that area is usually severly questioned by CBSA officers.

 

[sokosan]

I will post this information here as well just in case someone is combing old threads for information.

We went to Mexico for 2 weeks and came back March 3rd. The immigration officer looked at her a little crooked eyed and was a bit grumpy, but let her through (WITHOUT stamping the passport again, i.e. she is still on the original 6 months from October).

You are not allowed to live in Canada on a visitor visa. When someone starts spending more time in Canada than outside of Canada in any given year, this can be perceived by border officials as an abuse of the visitor visa priviledge which is only supposed to be used for TEMPORARY stays. If somone wants to live in Canada, they need to obtain a visa that allows the to do so.

I agree that you should limit visits outside of Canada as much as possible if you want your girlfriend to be able to stay for the whole period. Traveling in and out of Canada repeatedly for short visits to third countries is not the behaviour of a visitor to Canada - it's the behaviour of someone who is living in Canada. This is the sort of thing that can make border officials unhappy and that can result in issues re-entering Canada.

Clearly, you are not allowed to live in Canada on a visitor visa. However, the fact that the default stay for a visitor is 6 months and that this can be extended for another 6 months (of which this forum is full of), is a clear indication that the Canadian government does not consider staying 6 (or even potentially 12) months on a TRV "living" in Canada in the sense which you mean, i.e. 6-12 months on a TRV is indeed a TEMPORARY stay.

There lots of people with spouses and (grand)parents staying here on TRVs up to a year (this forum is full of them). By some definition of "living", we can easily say those people are "living" in Canada for 6 months or a year (6 months, is a long time...and this is the default granted stay). Clearly however, this is not the opinion of CIC, which grants them TRV extensions.

I agree with you that if someone staying in Canada for a few months is repeatedly making trips to third countries, that this can be suspicious. However this is not what we did, nor what we intended to do. We wished to make one trip - which we did, and we were fine. In fact, this is completely normal (making one trip to a third country). I consulted a bit wider than this forum (i.e. people who have done this in real life), and many people who come to Canada to visit their relatives or partners make trips to and from Canada once or twice, for example to the United States, Cuba, Mexico, etc. I have heard of many people doing this, and having no problems. Think about it, it's expected in fact: let's say you came from another continent (Europe) to North America to visit someone - first, it's a long and expensive trip, so staying for few weeks or months is not unusual (think of what Canadians do when they go visit Europe, especially if they are young and have just finished school - they stay there for several months); second, you are on another continent, and will probably take the opportunity to visit another part of it - i.e. Mexico, or the US. Esp. if you are visiting Canada during the winter and then go off to a sunny destination...doing such a thing shows you are a) a normal tourist, traveller b) have nothing to hide and fear from meeting a Canadian border officer.

A visitor is supposed to be someone that comes and stays for a short period of time and after the visit leaves.

True, in your case you are not violating the law.... but you are violating the "spirit of the law" by living in Canada under a visitor status. That is called an abuse. Abuses are legal, but it is just taking advantage of terms and conditions. This is something Canada doesn't like as in here "good faith" is the norm and "good faith" can't work if people are trying to take advantage of norms as long as "they are not doing something illegal".

That grey area is where you are moving.... and that area is usually severly questioned by CBSA officers.

First off, I am not violating anything, I am a Canadian citizen.

Second, there is no need for this arrogant tone, I've been a citizen since 1997, I have lived here for a total of 15+ years, and I've done 80% of my education here. I know very well how Canadian society works and functions, what are the "norms here" and what "good faith" is. What I'm not familiar with very well (well, know I've learned a lot) are the details of the Canadian visa system, since personally I've had no contact with it since 1994 (prior to last year).

Third, I respectfully disagree with you that my girlfriend is violating "the spirit of the law".

A "visitor" is supposed to be someone who stays no longer than the time allowed, while obeying the laws concerning their status. Visitors must leave once their allowed time is up, and they are not allowed to do many things, most importantly work, but they are in fact allowed to study for a limited time, and so on. There is nothing in either the letter or the spirit of the law which defines otherwise what a visitor is or what he must do. A person who spends 6 months (or more, if CIC allows him to) at a single place because he/she came to spend time with a loved one, is equally, letter and spirit, a "bona fide" visitor as someone who spends the 6 months travelling from Halifax to Whitehorse.

I don't agree that what my girlfriend is doing is abuse in any way, at least not in the opinion of the immigration authorities (which is the only thing which matters). If what she is doing would be recognized as abuse, first of all, Canada would not allow visitors to stay up to 6 months (and it routinely does), and second, they would not grant people in the exact same situation to extend their stay as visitors for up to 6 months (which they routinely do, this forum being the living proof of it).

Again, please don't think I'm picking a fight, you 2 guys are the most knowledgeable people on this forum (at least among those who are willing to answer questions regularly), you've helped a lot of people (myself included), and thanks a lot for that and hats off to you guys, really. You're great.

I just here you are being a bit too stringent - Canada's visa system is clearly not aimed at simply allowing short visits, if it was, they would have a system like the EU (90 days max. within a 180 day period). Long visits are not an abuse, in fact the regulations foresee them and allow them, you just have to convince the authorities that you are not doing anything illegal and that you intend to leave at the end.