Waiting + 3 months since test/interview to DM. Anyone else?

[Joshua1]

Yes, it is...I love it so much, the worst thing here is the long winter and the large amount of snow

Yup, I laugh at my GTA friends when they complain about 15 cm of snow and -10 degree. In that region, it's impossible to clear your own driveway during winter, unless you're retired and have a solid snowblower. That's a full time job.

 

[MoAnwar7]

My application is still in process since i passed my exam on March 2nd (Scarbrough). More than 9 weeks now and I'm getting frustrated.

what was your wait time between exam and DM?

 

[Danielnases]

My application is still in process since i passed my exam on March 2nd (Scarbrough). More than 9 weeks now and I'm getting frustrated.

what was your wait time between exam and DM?

Lol.

I passed my test and interview in Jan and still in Process

 

[imm_leb_01]

My application is still in process since i passed my exam on March 2nd (Scarbrough). More than 9 weeks now and I'm getting frustrated.

what was your wait time between exam and DM?

Test passed Feb 05th still IP

 

[imm_leb_01]

My application is still in process since i passed my exam on March 2nd (Scarbrough). More than 9 weeks now and I'm getting frustrated.

what was your wait time between exam and DM?

Even though you passed the test a month after me i expect you to get DM before me ... you went IP Dec 07th for me it was Dec 19th
I expect you get DM soon

 

[sappi]

Obtaining a copy of the ATIP generated GCMS client-report is NOT going to accomplish anything:

-- it will NOT accelerate the processing timeline
-- it will NOT provide you with any information which will help you make any decisions

-- -- this includes making any decisions in dealing with IRCC about your application
-- -- this includes making decisions about how to handle matters related to status in other countries
-- -- this includes making a decision about whether or when to apply for a new PR card​

I understand almost everyone is anxious and would like to know what will happen and WHEN. BUT you would do as well to boil some tea leaves, let them steep for a bit, drink or remove the water, and see what you can learn reading the tea leaves. Seriously.

I also understand many applicants have circumstances in their life which elevate the importance of what-and-WHEN for them. But again, there is no crystal ball. It will happen when it happens. And as I emphasized, it is not just that the timeline CAN vary, it WILL vary from one applicant to another.

You will learn as much as you can about what-and-when for your application by watching for communications and notifications from IRCC, including watching eCas. THAT'S IT. Sorry, really, and practically, that is it.

For example: As for IF or when to apply for a new PR card, in particular, again the ATIP reports are NOT going to help. For those who definitely need to have a valid PR card, watch the IRCC online information for how long it is currently taking routine applications, and apply with a few weeks margin before that. Consider the cost and effort as paying for insurance.

The spreadsheets may offer some indication. That information is not very reliable. General conclusions based on the spreadsheets tends to be less-than-credible. And, the spreadsheets offer NO assurance at all about how long it is likely to take any specific applicant, other than the spreadsheets can suggest a very broad ballpark range in which things are fairly likely to happen.

As little as the spreadsheets will help forecast an individual's timeline, that is WAY more information than the applicant will get from the ATIP GCMS notes.


THUS:


Understood. Of course. Many do indeed have reason to be anxious.

BUT IN THE MEANTIME, sorry, honestly, really and practically, the best the applicant can do is again: Relax. Be patient. Watch for communications from IRCC. And otherwise WAIT!

And of course make decisions in one's life according to the respective situation with due consideration for one's individual needs and priorities.

I agree that the ATIP requests aren't needed in most of the cases for citizenship applications and it is better to just be patient. However, sometimes these requests are useful.

I had my test in March 2018 and called IRCC call centre in April just to make sure there aren't any additional documents needed or anything like that. I was told everything looks good and nothing else is required from my end. I ordered ATIP notes and got them on May 2nd. The notes indicated fingerprints request on February 5th but I never received anything. Called call centre again but this time told them about the notes and the agent agreed that i should have received fingerprint request around February 5th and she sent a message to local office. The very next say i had an update on ECAS regarding correspondence and i received fingerprint request a day after.

Going by the fact that officer just forgot to send the correspondence and never bothered to go back to it without a reminder, I could have been waiting until like 12 months to just get the fingerprint request if it wasn't for ATIP notes. I have read similar experiences on here before too so the notes might not be a bad idea as long you don't misuse the service and order for lets say like 10 times.

 

[imm_leb_01]

I agree that the ATIP requests aren't needed in most of the cases for citizenship applications and it is better to just be patient. However, sometimes these requests are useful.

I had my test in March 2018 and called IRCC call centre in April just to make sure there aren't any additional documents needed or anything like that. I was told everything looks good and nothing else is required from my end. I ordered ATIP notes and got them on May 2nd. The notes indicated fingerprints request on February 5th but I never received anything. Called call centre again but this time told them about the notes and the agent agreed that i should have received fingerprint request around February 5th and she sent a message to local office. The very next say i had an update on ECAS regarding correspondence and i received fingerprint request a day after.

Going by the fact that officer just forgot to send the correspondence and never bothered to go back to it without a reminder, I could have been waiting until like 12 months to just get the fingerprint request if it wasn't for ATIP notes. I have read similar experiences on here before too so the notes might not be a bad idea as long you don't misuse the service and order for lets say like 10 times.

@dpenabill although you have good intentions and you are very helpful but telling people on this forum that ATIP will not accomplish anything is not accurate ... worst case it just gives you more details and best case it help you like in the case above

 

[bu ayaan]

@dpenabill although you have good intentions and you are very helpful but telling people on this forum that ATIP will not accomplish anything is not accurate ... worst case it just gives you more details and best case it help you like in the case above

Totally agree!!

 

[dpenabill]

@dpenabill although you have good intentions and you are very helpful but telling people on this forum that ATIP will not accomplish anything is not accurate ... worst case it just gives you more details and best case it help you like in the case above

No surprise: I disagree, rather emphatically actually.

Regarding this report, for example:

I agree that the ATIP requests aren't needed in most of the cases for citizenship applications and it is better to just be patient. However, sometimes these requests are useful.

I had my test in March 2018 and called IRCC call centre in April just to make sure there aren't any additional documents needed or anything like that. I was told everything looks good and nothing else is required from my end. I ordered ATIP notes and got them on May 2nd. The notes indicated fingerprints request on February 5th but I never received anything. Called call centre again but this time told them about the notes and the agent agreed that i should have received fingerprint request around February 5th and she sent a message to local office. The very next say i had an update on ECAS regarding correspondence and i received fingerprint request a day after.

Going by the fact that officer just forgot to send the correspondence and never bothered to go back to it without a reminder, I could have been waiting until like 12 months to just get the fingerprint request if it wasn't for ATIP notes. I have read similar experiences on here before too so the notes might not be a bad idea as long you don't misuse the service and order for lets say like 10 times.

To be clear, I not only acknowledge but will regularly include a reminder that there are indeed occasions in which making the ATIP request is a good idea.

However, I disagree with the conclusions in this report. There is good reason to believe that the actions taken by this applicant had no more than a nominal impact on the timeline, if that. The underlying premise in this report is that there was IRCC incompetence or error and the applicant's intervention resulted in exposing this, leading to a corrective action. In contrast, I believe that the FP request would have been made in due course and probably was actually sent about the same time it would have been if there was NO ATIP request or follow-up actions, and at the least a very high probability the application would have proceeded as usual with, at most, a small delay in the timeline. That is, I do not believe this had the effect reported. That is, I believe this application would have proceeded along roughly the same timeline even if no ATIP application was made, no follow-up intervention.

Obviously, there is NO way to prove either version, that is whether the ATIP and follow-up intervention made a significant difference in the timeline, or it did not (and obviously, where to from here, for this application, remains to be seen).

The evidence is nearly overwhelming, however, that every year, year after year, tens of thousands of applications stream through the process, month in and month out, without inordinate delays due to allegedly lost or erroneously set-aside applications. The only period of time in which this has not been the case was in the 2011 to early 2013 period, during the Harper-Kenney crack-down on fraud and the implementation of a disastrous pre-test RQ program sweeping, at times, more than one in four applications into RQ and the Residency-Case process, when CIC got so bogged down the system nearly broke. And even during that time, generic ATIP requests were a largely uninformative, useless nuisance (acknowledging, however, that on rare occasions requests for the physical file in addition to the GCMS report has generated informative output . . . the only publicly available copy of the File Requirements Checklist, for example, was inadvertently sent to an applicant and that provided forums a huge, huge insight into the process behind the curtains).

In any event, where this particular case goes from here, given that it is now a NON-routine application, that depends on the particular facts and circumstances in this individual's case. Non-routine applications are inherently at greater risk for problems, diversions, delays, and so on. Hopefully it goes well and there is an oath ceremony in the not-so-distant future. Whether that is how it actually goes, however, remains to be seen.

BUT the vast, vast majority of applicants will be processed ROUTINELY, no non-routine processing.

Leading to this:

". . . worst case it just gives you more details and best case it help you like in the case above"

This is myopic at best.

Beyond the fact that I highly doubt that the ATIP made much if any difference in the case above, there is some risk of a rather undesirable worst case:

Worst case is that a processing agent takes note that the applicant has made an ATIP request (reminder: the GCMS record shows access to the file for the purpose of providing applicant requested copy) and in wondering why the applicant has so much concern about the application, the processing agent goes digging in search of reasons for that, potentially tipping the application into non-routine processing, perhaps triggering elevated scrutiny, possibly even inviting a more skeptical assessment of the applicant. For the clearly qualified applicant, all this would do is cause some delay. Which is not good, not what most applicants would like, but not so bad. In contrast, for an applicant with a narrow margin over the minimum, or some error in the travel history, or something else about the application or applicant which might open some questions, this could lead to full blown Presence-Case processing, resulting in lengthy delays, or even a negative outcome in some cases.

I am not suggesting the risk of this, the worst case, is high. Indeed, I suspect the risk is low, since again IRCC processing agents generally are competent and know their job and perform their jobs reasonably well, and even applications with a wrinkle, or a wort or two, generally sail through the process in due course, routinely, no inordinate delays.

But I am suggesting that the risk of this is greater than the odds of obtaining any useful information. The odds a clearly qualified applicant in any way improving how things go for his or her application, by doing the ATIP request, are very, very low.

It is generally foolish to take even a small risk of causing a negative effect when there is very little chance of making things better. This is basic risk-avoidance.



WHAT REALLY MATTERS:

It is prudent for most applicants to not take even the very small risk of triggering questions which an ATIP request might, considering the minuscule chance of doing any good by making the ATIP request.

It is also good citizenship to NOT burden government services with unnecessary demands on resources.

BUT the real reason this matters has to do with dispelling unnecessary apprehension, lowering anxiety levels. The vast majority of applicants can RELAX. All is well. It is going to go smoothly. It is going to go OK. No need to fret. No need to take extraordinary measures to make sure things are going to go OK. The odds are overwhelming, so long as the applicant is indeed qualified, and the applicant accurately and appropriately submitted information in the application, THAT ALL WILL GO WELL and it will go well in due course without delay.

The discussions favourable to making ATIP requests are part of a bigger picture in this forum, which in the last several months has inordinately increased expectations, heightened anticipation, while at the same time provoking an immoderate and undue sense of fear about the process, suggesting that applicants need to do things like make ATIP requests. They do not.

For example, this forum is rife with building expectations based on the fastest timelines reported. This is a disservice for most who come here for information and support. Many if not most should expect their timeline to be roughly twice as long as the fastest reported timelines, and many will encounter a timeline that is nearly three times as long as the fastest timelines. THIS IS TO BE EXPECTED. And there is virtually NOTHING an applicant can do to accelerate his or her own timeline.

In contrast, much of the discussion here appears to escalate applicants' fears if it takes a month longer for their application to show up In Process, or three months longer for them to be scheduled for the test.

Much of the discussion here tends to suggest applicants would be wise to make the ATIP request so they can avoid some hidden flaw in how their application is being handled.

NO NO NO. APPLICANTS CAN AND SHOULD RELAX. This is a process to ENJOY not fear.

OK, sure, some of you have reason to be more apprehensive, be those incidental or due to circumstances beyond one's control, or due to less than virtuous motives. You mostly know who you are. And why. BUT ALMOST EVERYONE ELSE has no reason to worry. No need to fear. No need to check eCas every day (once or twice a week is plenty), let alone telephone the call centre, let alone make the ATIP request for GCMS notes. And that is a message worth repeating. Don't worry. Be happy. Look forward to taking the oath and embracing the life of a Canadian citizen.

 

[dpenabill]

Additional note about the report from sappi:

This was already a non-routine application since the applicant was unable to attend the regularly scheduled test/interview:

My test was scheduled for February 21, 2018. But i have requested IRCC to reschedule my test. I called IRCC today and an agent told me that my request has been accepted and that my test will be rescheduled. My question is how long will it take them to reschedule my test? Any idea when can i approximately see an update on ECAS regarding new test date?

Among many possible variations in what happened, and why, it may have been that the applicant's request to reschedule the test was a factor in the timing of the FP request. It is also possible that during a processing agent's preparation for the test, the agent discerned a reason to request FPs which was contingent on how things went at the interview, and possible sappi's case could have proceeded to a Decision without the FPs EXCEPT for the intervention by sappi. Among a range of other behind the curtains possibilities. We do not know.

In contrast, what we do know is that every month many thousands of applications stream through the process without any inordinate delays, without a problem, the vast, vast majority of applications sailing smoothly through the process: application-AOR-IP-Test/Interview-Oath, no side trips, no delays, no problems, just however long it takes. No ATIP requests. NO GCMS notes obtained.

 

[wannabecitizen89]

No surprise: I disagree, rather emphatically actually.

Regarding this report, for example:



To be clear, I not only acknowledge but will regularly include a reminder that there are indeed occasions in which making the ATIP request is a good idea.

However, I disagree with the conclusions in this report. There is good reason to believe that the actions taken by this applicant had no more than a nominal impact on the timeline, if that. The underlying premise in this report is that there was IRCC incompetence or error and the applicant's intervention resulted in exposing this, leading to a corrective action. In contrast, I believe that the FP request would have been made in due course and probably was actually sent about the same time it would have been if there was NO ATIP request or follow-up actions, and at the least a very high probability the application would have proceeded as usual with, at most, a small delay in the timeline. That is, I do not believe this had the effect reported. That is, I believe this application would have proceeded along roughly the same timeline even if no ATIP application was made, no follow-up intervention.

Obviously, there is NO way to prove either version, that is whether the ATIP and follow-up intervention made a significant difference in the timeline, or it did not (and obviously, where to from here, for this application, remains to be seen).

The evidence is nearly overwhelming, however, that every year, year after year, tens of thousands of applications stream through the process, month in and month out, without inordinate delays due to allegedly lost or erroneously set-aside applications. The only period of time in which this has not been the case was in the 2011 to early 2013 period, during the Harper-Kenney crack-down on fraud and the implementation of a disastrous pre-test RQ program sweeping, at times, more than one in four applications into RQ and the Residency-Case process, when CIC got so bogged down the system nearly broke. And even during that time, generic ATIP requests were a largely uninformative, useless nuisance (acknowledging, however, that on rare occasions requests for the physical file in addition to the GCMS report has generated informative output . . . the only publicly available copy of the File Requirements Checklist, for example, was inadvertently sent to an applicant and that provided forums a huge, huge insight into the process behind the curtains).

In any event, where this particular case goes from here, given that it is now a NON-routine application, that depends on the particular facts and circumstances in this individual's case. Non-routine applications are inherently at greater risk for problems, diversions, delays, and so on. Hopefully it goes well and there is an oath ceremony in the not-so-distant future. Whether that is how it actually goes, however, remains to be seen.

BUT the vast, vast majority of applicants will be processed ROUTINELY, no non-routine processing.

Leading to this:

". . . worst case it just gives you more details and best case it help you like in the case above"

This is myopic at best.

Beyond the fact that I highly doubt that the ATIP made much if any difference in the case above, there is some risk of a rather undesirable worst case:

Worst case is that a processing agent takes note that the applicant has made an ATIP request (reminder: the GCMS record shows access to the file for the purpose of providing applicant requested copy) and in wondering why the applicant has so much concern about the application, the processing agent goes digging in search of reasons for that, potentially tipping the application into non-routine processing, perhaps triggering elevated scrutiny, possibly even inviting a more skeptical assessment of the applicant. For the clearly qualified applicant, all this would do is cause some delay. Which is not good, not what most applicants would like, but not so bad. In contrast, for an applicant with a narrow margin over the minimum, or some error in the travel history, or something else about the application or applicant which might open some questions, this could lead to full blown Presence-Case processing, resulting in lengthy delays, or even a negative outcome in some cases.

I am not suggesting the risk of this, the worst case, is high. Indeed, I suspect the risk is low, since again IRCC processing agents generally are competent and know their job and perform their jobs reasonably well, and even applications with a wrinkle, or a wort or two, generally sail through the process in due course, routinely, no inordinate delays.

But I am suggesting that the risk of this is greater than the odds of obtaining any useful information. The odds a clearly qualified applicant in any way improving how things go for his or her application, by doing the ATIP request, are very, very low.

It is generally foolish to take even a small risk of causing a negative effect when there is very little chance of making things better. This is basic risk-avoidance.



WHAT REALLY MATTERS:

It is prudent for most applicants to not take even the very small risk of triggering questions which an ATIP request might, considering the minuscule chance of doing any good by making the ATIP request.

It is also good citizenship to NOT burden government services with unnecessary demands on resources.

BUT the real reason this matters has to do with dispelling unnecessary apprehension, lowering anxiety levels. The vast majority of applicants can RELAX. All is well. It is going to go smoothly. It is going to go OK. No need to fret. No need to take extraordinary measures to make sure things are going to go OK. The odds are overwhelming, so long as the applicant is indeed qualified, and the applicant accurately and appropriately submitted information in the application, THAT ALL WILL GO WELL and it will go well in due course without delay.

The discussions favourable to making ATIP requests are part of a bigger picture in this forum, which in the last several months has inordinately increased expectations, heightened anticipation, while at the same time provoking an immoderate and undue sense of fear about the process, suggesting that applicants need to do things like make ATIP requests. They do not.

For example, this forum is rife with building expectations based on the fastest timelines reported. This is a disservice for most who come here for information and support. Many if not most should expect their timeline to be roughly twice as long as the fastest reported timelines, and many will encounter a timeline that is nearly three times as long as the fastest timelines. THIS IS TO BE EXPECTED. And there is virtually NOTHING an applicant can do to accelerate his or her own timeline.

In contrast, much of the discussion here appears to escalate applicants' fears if it takes a month longer for their application to show up In Process, or three months longer for them to be scheduled for the test.

Much of the discussion here tends to suggest applicants would be wise to make the ATIP request so they can avoid some hidden flaw in how their application is being handled.

NO NO NO. APPLICANTS CAN AND SHOULD RELAX. This is a process to ENJOY not fear.

OK, sure, some of you have reason to be more apprehensive, be those incidental or due to circumstances beyond one's control, or due to less than virtuous motives. You mostly know who you are. And why. BUT ALMOST EVERYONE ELSE has no reason to worry. No need to fear. No need to check eCas every day (once or twice a week is plenty), let alone telephone the call centre, let alone make the ATIP request for GCMS notes. And that is a message worth repeating. Don't worry. Be happy. Look forward to taking the oath and embracing the life of a Canadian citizen.

Well you just made me extremely worried now.

Lately i called cic center frequently once-twice a week to ask for my application status ... would this hurt me ? can the processing agent consider my queries as a reason to suspect that something is wrong and make my app none-routine ?

 

[dpenabill]

Well you just made me extremely worried now.

Lately i called cic center frequently once-twice a week to ask for my application status ... would this hurt me ? can the processing agent consider my queries as a reason to suspect that something is wrong and make my app none-routine ?

Odd are NO. Odds are you are OK . . . or at least this would NOT be a reason for worrying.

MY POST WAS INTENDED TO EMPHASIZE THAT APPLICANTS CAN AND SHOULD RELAX. NOT WORRY.

Really.

The odds of a problem are very, very low. OK, yeah, applicants who keep poking a stick into the process probably increase their risk of triggering elevated scrutiny, some. No great prophetic vision necessary to figure that out. But not a lot.

Your frequent calling is mostly a nuisance. A waste of resources. And of course you are part of the problem many have in getting through. (So do not be surprised if there is some anger among other participants.)

BUT it is not likely you are doing yourself any good. So it is not prudent to keep poking a stick into the process even if that only increases the risk of causing a problem by a tiny amount.

AS I OFT NOTE: of course, some do indeed have real cause to make inquiries, including the ATIP request. I do NOT mean to discourage the utilization of these resources when warranted. Call centre contact can be important in many instances. ATIP applications, particularly customized requests, can be an important tool for some applicants in peculiar situations.

AND AS I ALSO OFT NOTE: there are of course many who know there is reason to be concerned about their applications. My observations here are aimed at separating those from the VAST majority of applicants. To remind the vast majority there is NO reason to worry. Really. Relax. Even if things seem to be going a lot slower than you think they should. Odds are very good all is well.

By the way, my direct response here does not mean I am blind to the sarcasm. On the contrary. My point is to make a concerted effort to calm-the-waters, to reassure the vast majority of applicants they can relax, not worry, and do not need to bite fear bait. And this is a message worth emphasizing. No need to bite any bait.

 

[sappi]

I am not advocating use of ATIP reports or saying it is always useful anything. To be honest, we all are at the point where we have dealt with IRCC for a long time and we have our own opinions which are likely not going to change no matter how many times you repeatedly suggest otherwise.

In my case, the fingerprint request was not sent when it was suppose to be sent. The agent herself said that it should have been received around February 5th. And that is why she sent a message to the local office right away. I got the correspondence update the very next day on my ECAS. So it is as clear as it gets that the agent forgot and with my reminder, message was sent and the very next day Fingerprints were requested. So that's very very good reason for me to say ATIPs are useful in some situations. It does not even matter if it impacted the overall timeline or not AT all to me. What matters is something was planned to be done at certain time and it was not done until the point i intervened (like correction made the very next day can not be a coincident). With fingerprints now done, i at least have piece of mind. And me rescheduling my test had nothing to do with this because I did clarify with the agent and she said we only change things like schedule of your test or oath date in such circumstances and fingerprints request delay has nothing to do with it.

I think it all goes back to same point. If we are applying for citizenship then it can safely be assumed that we have dealt with IRCC long enough. It will be my decision to see if this intervention was valuable to me or not and no one else. and since it was valuable to me, I feel ATIP request was very useful in my case to me. So just like people above suggested, let them decide if they want to do ATIP request or not. You have given them your detailed opinion and it is very much appreciated because it adds to everyone's knowledge but like i said, we all have our own opinions. So yes, applicants can relax but if they should or not, its really upto them not anyone else.

 

[MoAnwar7]

I am not advocating use of ATIP reports or saying it is always useful anything. To be honest, we all are at the point where we have dealt with IRCC for a long time and we have our own opinions which are likely not going to change no matter how many times you repeatedly suggest otherwise.

In my case, the fingerprint request was not sent when it was suppose to be sent. The agent herself said that it should have been received around February 5th. And that is why she sent a message to the local office right away. I got the correspondence update the very next day on my ECAS. So it is as clear as it gets that the agent forgot and with my reminder, message was sent and the very next day Fingerprints were requested. So that's very very good reason for me to say ATIPs are useful in some situations. It does not even matter if it impacted the overall timeline or not AT all to me. What matters is something was planned to be done at certain time and it was not done until the point i intervened (like correction made the very next day can not be a coincident). With fingerprints now done, i at least have piece of mind. And me rescheduling my test had nothing to do with this because I did clarify with the agent and she said we only change things like schedule of your test or oath date in such circumstances and fingerprints request delay has nothing to do with it.

I think it all goes back to same point. If we are applying for citizenship then it can safely be assumed that we have dealt with IRCC long enough. It will be my decision to see if this intervention was valuable to me or not and no one else. and since it was valuable to me, I feel ATIP request was very useful in my case to me. So just like people above suggested, let them decide if they want to do ATIP request or not. You have given them your detailed opinion and it is very much appreciated because it adds to everyone's knowledge but like i said, we all have our own opinions. So yes, applicants can relax but if they should or not, its really upto them not anyone else.

I just applied for ATIP (status updates and notes). Lets see what happens.

 

[imm_leb_01]

No surprise: I disagree, rather emphatically actually.

Regarding this report, for example:



To be clear, I not only acknowledge but will regularly include a reminder that there are indeed occasions in which making the ATIP request is a good idea.

However, I disagree with the conclusions in this report. There is good reason to believe that the actions taken by this applicant had no more than a nominal impact on the timeline, if that. The underlying premise in this report is that there was IRCC incompetence or error and the applicant's intervention resulted in exposing this, leading to a corrective action. In contrast, I believe that the FP request would have been made in due course and probably was actually sent about the same time it would have been if there was NO ATIP request or follow-up actions, and at the least a very high probability the application would have proceeded as usual with, at most, a small delay in the timeline. That is, I do not believe this had the effect reported. That is, I believe this application would have proceeded along roughly the same timeline even if no ATIP application was made, no follow-up intervention.

Obviously, there is NO way to prove either version, that is whether the ATIP and follow-up intervention made a significant difference in the timeline, or it did not (and obviously, where to from here, for this application, remains to be seen).

The evidence is nearly overwhelming, however, that every year, year after year, tens of thousands of applications stream through the process, month in and month out, without inordinate delays due to allegedly lost or erroneously set-aside applications. The only period of time in which this has not been the case was in the 2011 to early 2013 period, during the Harper-Kenney crack-down on fraud and the implementation of a disastrous pre-test RQ program sweeping, at times, more than one in four applications into RQ and the Residency-Case process, when CIC got so bogged down the system nearly broke. And even during that time, generic ATIP requests were a largely uninformative, useless nuisance (acknowledging, however, that on rare occasions requests for the physical file in addition to the GCMS report has generated informative output . . . the only publicly available copy of the File Requirements Checklist, for example, was inadvertently sent to an applicant and that provided forums a huge, huge insight into the process behind the curtains).

In any event, where this particular case goes from here, given that it is now a NON-routine application, that depends on the particular facts and circumstances in this individual's case. Non-routine applications are inherently at greater risk for problems, diversions, delays, and so on. Hopefully it goes well and there is an oath ceremony in the not-so-distant future. Whether that is how it actually goes, however, remains to be seen.

BUT the vast, vast majority of applicants will be processed ROUTINELY, no non-routine processing.

Leading to this:

". . . worst case it just gives you more details and best case it help you like in the case above"

This is myopic at best.

Beyond the fact that I highly doubt that the ATIP made much if any difference in the case above, there is some risk of a rather undesirable worst case:

Worst case is that a processing agent takes note that the applicant has made an ATIP request (reminder: the GCMS record shows access to the file for the purpose of providing applicant requested copy) and in wondering why the applicant has so much concern about the application, the processing agent goes digging in search of reasons for that, potentially tipping the application into non-routine processing, perhaps triggering elevated scrutiny, possibly even inviting a more skeptical assessment of the applicant. For the clearly qualified applicant, all this would do is cause some delay. Which is not good, not what most applicants would like, but not so bad. In contrast, for an applicant with a narrow margin over the minimum, or some error in the travel history, or something else about the application or applicant which might open some questions, this could lead to full blown Presence-Case processing, resulting in lengthy delays, or even a negative outcome in some cases.

I am not suggesting the risk of this, the worst case, is high. Indeed, I suspect the risk is low, since again IRCC processing agents generally are competent and know their job and perform their jobs reasonably well, and even applications with a wrinkle, or a wort or two, generally sail through the process in due course, routinely, no inordinate delays.

But I am suggesting that the risk of this is greater than the odds of obtaining any useful information. The odds a clearly qualified applicant in any way improving how things go for his or her application, by doing the ATIP request, are very, very low.

It is generally foolish to take even a small risk of causing a negative effect when there is very little chance of making things better. This is basic risk-avoidance.



WHAT REALLY MATTERS:

It is prudent for most applicants to not take even the very small risk of triggering questions which an ATIP request might, considering the minuscule chance of doing any good by making the ATIP request.

It is also good citizenship to NOT burden government services with unnecessary demands on resources.

BUT the real reason this matters has to do with dispelling unnecessary apprehension, lowering anxiety levels. The vast majority of applicants can RELAX. All is well. It is going to go smoothly. It is going to go OK. No need to fret. No need to take extraordinary measures to make sure things are going to go OK. The odds are overwhelming, so long as the applicant is indeed qualified, and the applicant accurately and appropriately submitted information in the application, THAT ALL WILL GO WELL and it will go well in due course without delay.

The discussions favourable to making ATIP requests are part of a bigger picture in this forum, which in the last several months has inordinately increased expectations, heightened anticipation, while at the same time provoking an immoderate and undue sense of fear about the process, suggesting that applicants need to do things like make ATIP requests. They do not.

For example, this forum is rife with building expectations based on the fastest timelines reported. This is a disservice for most who come here for information and support. Many if not most should expect their timeline to be roughly twice as long as the fastest reported timelines, and many will encounter a timeline that is nearly three times as long as the fastest timelines. THIS IS TO BE EXPECTED. And there is virtually NOTHING an applicant can do to accelerate his or her own timeline.

In contrast, much of the discussion here appears to escalate applicants' fears if it takes a month longer for their application to show up In Process, or three months longer for them to be scheduled for the test.

Much of the discussion here tends to suggest applicants would be wise to make the ATIP request so they can avoid some hidden flaw in how their application is being handled.

NO NO NO. APPLICANTS CAN AND SHOULD RELAX. This is a process to ENJOY not fear.

OK, sure, some of you have reason to be more apprehensive, be those incidental or due to circumstances beyond one's control, or due to less than virtuous motives. You mostly know who you are. And why. BUT ALMOST EVERYONE ELSE has no reason to worry. No need to fear. No need to check eCas every day (once or twice a week is plenty), let alone telephone the call centre, let alone make the ATIP request for GCMS notes. And that is a message worth repeating. Don't worry. Be happy. Look forward to taking the oath and embracing the life of a Canadian citizen.

hahaha wow ... I think we disagree on one thing ... i think the odds that ordering ATIP request could result in something positive is higher than it causing a delay. And that's based on observations on this forum. Yesterday read about someone that called cic and discovered that an oath invitation was sent to him but didn't reach his mailbox just few days before the oath date and by calling them they re-sent another one. He avoided missing the ceremony by calling checking on his status. Plus saw enormous amount of people ordering multiple ATIP and their process was smooth.
At the other side i never read a case where ATIP caused delays (it may have happened but never heard someone say that it happened to him)

Bottom line is i understand your point that the worst case maybe a delay to your application but i disagree that the odds of a delay is greater than the odds of a positive outcome.