Unfortunately I applied for PRTD with only 61 days short of required 730 days and denied the PRTD. I am going to appeal to IAD as per provision in the law. Can I count time after I have received CIC letter rejecting my request till I appear for appeal?
URGENT please reply: applied for PRTD with 61 days short of RO
- Thread starter lilua
- Start date
If you applied for PRTD and were refused, I assume that you are stuck outside Canada?
I am not the expert on this, but from what I understand, time you are in Canada whilst waiting for your appeal at the IAD does not count towards the five year period that is being considered at your appeal hearing.
You may be able to apply to apply for permission to your local embassy/high commission to attend your IAD appeal hearing in person in Canada rather than by telephone.
If you are married to a Canadian citizen, and spent time abroad with him/her to help explain why you are short of 60 days, then that should surely help you win your appeal at IAD? Or does the 60 days you are short already take into account the time abroad you claimed to be married and living with a Canadian citizen?
I am not the expert on this, but from what I understand, time you are in Canada whilst waiting for your appeal at the IAD does not count towards the five year period that is being considered at your appeal hearing.
You may be able to apply to apply for permission to your local embassy/high commission to attend your IAD appeal hearing in person in Canada rather than by telephone.
If you are married to a Canadian citizen, and spent time abroad with him/her to help explain why you are short of 60 days, then that should surely help you win your appeal at IAD? Or does the 60 days you are short already take into account the time abroad you claimed to be married and living with a Canadian citizen?
axelfoley said:
I was short of 60 days counting the time spent with my Canadian Citizen wife. I am still outside Canada with my Canadian wife. I have still time to appeal till end of May 2016. By May 2016, I can have the required time to fullfill 730. I just want to know whether this time after the received the letter from CIC refusing my PRTD will be counted?
Sure you are already reported so it doesn't matter if you're reported again while crossing by land.lilua said:
Or, if you want to appeal then you can apply for a special PR Travel Doc that will be granted to you to fly directly to Canada specifically for the appeal. You will also be able to renew your PR card in 1 year increments while waiting for the appeal.
Thank you for your insightful siggestions and advise. I need to visit Canada in August 2016 to accompany my son who has been admitted to a Canadian university. Can I expect a Special Travel Document by that time. Or I have to wait till a hearing date is fixed at a later time. In that case I should not go for appeal and wait till the appeal time elapsed and I lose PR status to apply for a visitor visa. What is your view?Rob_TO said:
I cannot offer any advice, except the advice to be highly skeptical of any advice given in a forum like this (this is not an appropriate venue for obtaining or giving advice).
What course of action you take is something you need to decide for yourself based on all the information you can obtain and your best judgment, based in large part on all the particular aspects and circumstances of your specific situation.
If, for example, your odds of making the H&C case on appeal are not at all good, it may be better to surrender PR status and visit Canada; this would be particularly so if you are not ready to come to Canada to settle and stay in Canada. But that calculation is for you to make based on your specific situation.
In any event, I can offer some observations:
As zardoz observed, for purposes of calculating days present in Canada, once a PR TD has been denied, days in Canada do not count. However, to the extent you may have H&C reasons, and family in Canada is at least some step toward H&C reasons, if you are able to return to Canada and stay in Canada, the days in Canada can factor significantly into how the IAD ultimately rules on the appeal.
So the sooner you come to Canada, and stay in Canada, the better your odds of succeeding in the appeal. Thus, for example, if you are able to travel to the U.S., then if you can travel by private vehicle to Canada, that may indeed be an option. At the PoE, yes, your passport plus expired PR card will get you into Canada. Of course this is of little value if you cannot come to stay.
Odds of being reported at the PoE for PR RO breach, again, are unlikely: if questioned about PR status, you acknowledge you applied for PR TD and was denied and have filed an appeal. They will readily confirm this in their computer. Odds then are you are allowed entry, no additional inadmissibility report. Actually good if this happens because it will make a for sure record of your entry (entries are now generally all recorded, but there are occasional lapses), thus showing you in Canada as of that date.
Appeals can easily take a year or more; seen some taking up to three years (not sure why some go longer).
Regarding special PR TD to be in Canada for appeal:
Generally, you need to have been present in Canada within the previous year to qualify for a special PR Travel Document, although apparently there are exceptions if IRCC is persuaded there are reasons why you need to be personally present for the appeal.
You can only obtain the one-year PR card, and potentially a replacement when the first one expires (again, appeals can take a couple years), once you are in Canada. Such a card will allow you to travel abroad and return to Canada -- but note: if you are serious about pursuing H&C arguments, best to minimize time out of Canada.
What course of action you take is something you need to decide for yourself based on all the information you can obtain and your best judgment, based in large part on all the particular aspects and circumstances of your specific situation.
If, for example, your odds of making the H&C case on appeal are not at all good, it may be better to surrender PR status and visit Canada; this would be particularly so if you are not ready to come to Canada to settle and stay in Canada. But that calculation is for you to make based on your specific situation.
In any event, I can offer some observations:
As zardoz observed, for purposes of calculating days present in Canada, once a PR TD has been denied, days in Canada do not count. However, to the extent you may have H&C reasons, and family in Canada is at least some step toward H&C reasons, if you are able to return to Canada and stay in Canada, the days in Canada can factor significantly into how the IAD ultimately rules on the appeal.
So the sooner you come to Canada, and stay in Canada, the better your odds of succeeding in the appeal. Thus, for example, if you are able to travel to the U.S., then if you can travel by private vehicle to Canada, that may indeed be an option. At the PoE, yes, your passport plus expired PR card will get you into Canada. Of course this is of little value if you cannot come to stay.
Odds of being reported at the PoE for PR RO breach, again, are unlikely: if questioned about PR status, you acknowledge you applied for PR TD and was denied and have filed an appeal. They will readily confirm this in their computer. Odds then are you are allowed entry, no additional inadmissibility report. Actually good if this happens because it will make a for sure record of your entry (entries are now generally all recorded, but there are occasional lapses), thus showing you in Canada as of that date.
Appeals can easily take a year or more; seen some taking up to three years (not sure why some go longer).
Regarding special PR TD to be in Canada for appeal:
Generally, you need to have been present in Canada within the previous year to qualify for a special PR Travel Document, although apparently there are exceptions if IRCC is persuaded there are reasons why you need to be personally present for the appeal.
You can only obtain the one-year PR card, and potentially a replacement when the first one expires (again, appeals can take a couple years), once you are in Canada. Such a card will allow you to travel abroad and return to Canada -- but note: if you are serious about pursuing H&C arguments, best to minimize time out of Canada.
You can apply for the one-year PR card soon after arrival, yes. But like any bureaucratic process involving IRCC, no, it is not immediate, not like going into a Service Ontario centre and obtaining an Ontario drivers license upon surrendering a drivers license from a jurisdiction which Ontario recognizes.
It will take time. I do not know the processing time for such applications.
Yes, this and other similar forums are indeed a good place to share information, experience, and insight, even to vent some, and can thus be very helpful.
Declarative advice, however, is inherently suspect. There are obvious exceptions, like advice which amounts to simply restating a well-known, fixed rule, like the advice to meet the PR Residency Obligation before applying to renew a PR card. But any advice which is in any way an opinion, or dependent on the particular facts and circumstances, is inherently suspect; indeed, again with some exceptions, better to generally mistrust posts made by those who offer declarative advice.
There is a reason why communications with lawyers are strictly confidential: so that those seeking advice can fully divulge all potentially relevant information (not just what the client thinks is relevant, but all potentially pertinent information), so that the lawyer can better assess the situation and offer advice. That is the least an experienced lawyer needs, the least, to offer any advice approaching a reliable opinion (and which is why free consultations are inherently general information not personal advice, except, again, as to simple, obvious matters, like you need 730 days in Canada to be in compliance with the PR RO). Even then, the opinion one obtains from a lawyer tends to be rife with caveats, contingencies, qualifications, and probabilities, unless again it is a matter of applying a simple, well-known and fixed rule. A venue like this forum does not facilitate the exchange of anywhere near enough information to so much as approximate the lawyer-client interaction.
Of course most prefer simple answers, straight-forward declarative instruction or advice.
But the reality is that there are way too many nuances, potential pitfalls, caveats and exceptions, all subject to the particular details of the individual's specific facts and circumstances, to rely on simple, declarative advice offered in a forum like this -- so much so, again any such advice is inherently suspect and, frankly, so is the source of any such advice.
It will take time. I do not know the processing time for such applications.
Yes, this and other similar forums are indeed a good place to share information, experience, and insight, even to vent some, and can thus be very helpful.
Declarative advice, however, is inherently suspect. There are obvious exceptions, like advice which amounts to simply restating a well-known, fixed rule, like the advice to meet the PR Residency Obligation before applying to renew a PR card. But any advice which is in any way an opinion, or dependent on the particular facts and circumstances, is inherently suspect; indeed, again with some exceptions, better to generally mistrust posts made by those who offer declarative advice.
There is a reason why communications with lawyers are strictly confidential: so that those seeking advice can fully divulge all potentially relevant information (not just what the client thinks is relevant, but all potentially pertinent information), so that the lawyer can better assess the situation and offer advice. That is the least an experienced lawyer needs, the least, to offer any advice approaching a reliable opinion (and which is why free consultations are inherently general information not personal advice, except, again, as to simple, obvious matters, like you need 730 days in Canada to be in compliance with the PR RO). Even then, the opinion one obtains from a lawyer tends to be rife with caveats, contingencies, qualifications, and probabilities, unless again it is a matter of applying a simple, well-known and fixed rule. A venue like this forum does not facilitate the exchange of anywhere near enough information to so much as approximate the lawyer-client interaction.
Of course most prefer simple answers, straight-forward declarative instruction or advice.
But the reality is that there are way too many nuances, potential pitfalls, caveats and exceptions, all subject to the particular details of the individual's specific facts and circumstances, to rely on simple, declarative advice offered in a forum like this -- so much so, again any such advice is inherently suspect and, frankly, so is the source of any such advice.