RQ discussions.

Vancan2012 wrote: Someone (Akella?, EasyRider?) shared an ATIP within the last 4-8 months with this information. It wasn't specifically about applicants with foreign addresses, but one of the internal emails did mention that previously offices were instructed to pause applications indefinitely for applicants with declared addresses of residence abroad. Maybe someone remembers which document that is and can help us pinpoint the source.

It's from this post: https://secure.immigration.ca/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=12858&title=cic-will-google-you

Guys, I received a RQ and I have 10 days left to send the docs back. As a background:

Edited by Newbie_CAN_US - 02 Oct 2013 at 9:51pm

HI, thanks for your response. 

Newbie_CAN_US wrote: I landed July 3, 2008 and returned to the US for a year before finally coming to Canada on May 15, 2009. I have left Canada about 56 days since to visit my family in the US (95% of the time by road) so no passport stamps to show the dates. I am writing to solicit help on the level of detail required to provide to the CIC office in Scarborough (which is where I have been asked to send my stuff). I have the following docs and please opine if this is enough detail: December 24, 2008-May 14, 2009: Absent (I am choosing this date as you have to go back 4 years from date of Application which is December 24, 2012. - May 15 to December 2009: Lived on rent and landlord cant be located ..had no lease. However, I have a letter from a NPO I worked for certifying I worked for them. Also have the Tax filings etc and Credit Card statements. - January 1 to December 31, 2010: Tax Filings as I was employed FT, Bank Statements, NPO Letter (part time volunteering now), Landlord Letter certifying rent amount and time spent. - January 1 to December 31, 2011: Tax Filings as I was employed FT, Bank Statements, Rental Agreements - January 1 to December 24, 2012: Same as above. For the Entry and Exit records, I was told by the CBSA when I called that if I check the box on the form to let them obtain info from CBSA, I should be ok. I am trying my best to read the requirements very closely. In my call with CIC, they told me that I shouldnt get too nervous about ALL the docs listed as options and just provide what I have. Im glad I dont have to get Entry/Exit info from CBSA and that they are going to get it directly from CBSA. As for your comment for Employment proof, do you think the T4 and the Tax Filings are sufficient or should I provide them offer letters for the roles?Also, I never thought I would be in this position so I discarded the pay stubs which would be a tough call to procure at this point with only 10 days to go so it is what it is. Secondly, I am assuming this takes my timeline to an automatic 35 months? lol....

While generally I tend to not put much stock into call centre statements, unless the statement is confirmed by other reliable sources, I have to say that in many respects I think this one is rather apt for many pre-test RQ'd applicants:

In my call with CIC, they told me that I shouldnt get too nervous about ALL the docs listed as options and just provide what I have.

This comes with a big, big caveat, of course, an obvious caveat, having to do with the actual merits of the case and an assumption that someone who has in fact been residing and present in Canada should fairly easily have sufficient documentation to meet the burden of proof.

However, for most of us swept into the RQ mire due to what amounts to a mechanical application of technical criteria, there being no real concerns, no actual suspicions at stake, the submission of key documents showing where we lived, where we were employed, should readily suffice. No need to go overboard.

The problem, of course, is rooted in risk-avoidance, the temptation being to not take a chance that something left out would make the difference. Such anxiety is common, easily understood, and unfortunately there are no hard and fast specifications guaranteeing the outcome if this or that is submitted. Too many variables at play for hard and fast, game-like rules and scores.

Deciding what to submit is a very personal decision, dependent on the individual's particular facts and circumstances.

While there are no hard and fast guidelines, there are the basic, key documents: all travel documents (passports and visas and similar) plus direct documentation which shows where the applicant lived and where the applicant was working or going to school, and all months should be covered. If this basic, key documentation is provided covering every month the applicant declared to be resident in Canada, that alone should suffice. But many of us will want to bolster that with more. What more should we include? Some lean toward big boxes full of pages of bank and credit card statements, utility or telephone bills, and so on. My sense is that less can often be more. The more direct and less bulky the documentation is, to my view, the better it is to include.

You mention letters reflecting the offers of employment. These should amount to a small amount of paper but fit in cleanly with your T4s. No one should get bogged down or sidetracked by the presence of these. That is, they seem to be worth including.

Four years worth of credit card and bank statements, on the other hand, can be a big pile of at best passive, indirect evidence of minimal influence, minimal evidentiary weight. Sure, some applicants need to submit more of this sort of thing: Such as the individual who has no other documentation to show where he was living during a significant period of time.

As for the "timeline:"
No, getting pre-test RQ does not take a particular individual's case to any particular timeline. Yes, it means it will longer than it would have been if it was a routine case. But how much longer is near impossible to predict. Nearly four out of five non-routine cases took less than 35 months in the last period of time CIC is reporting timelines for. Only one in five took that long or longer. Where you will fall, however, cannot be forecast: could be a lot less (many RQ'd applicants have reported less than two year timelines), could be in that two to three year range, or it could be longer, even a lot longer. No point, really, in trying to guess.



Policy of putting abroad applicants on hold indefinitely
Perhaps the difference is one in wording.

Or, perhaps references were to the practical effect of certain policies, not to a particular policy to place abroad applicants on an indefinite hold.

I took this:

There were some internal documents released where applications for people who are out of Canada are paused indefinitely.

to indicate a claim that there was an internal CIC communication stating a policy to put applicants who are outside Canada on hold indefinitely. Again, I have seen no such internal communications. I am skeptical of any claim that there have been such internal communications.

In contrast, we have seen reports of some applicants who progressed through the process to the oath even though they were abroad while the application was pending.

But, also in contrast (going to the practical effect of certain policies), I also stated:

That said, there are many indications that those who are living abroad after applying may indeed face extraordinary long timelines, and perhaps some of the referrals and inquiries being made are made to intentionally extend the processing time for applicants abroad. But this is probably very case specific. For example, we have had reports here from individuals who went abroad after applying for a specific, temporary purpose (such as a particular educational program), who had NO problem with their application and who, thus, progressed throught the process to the oath without issue. On the other hand, for those who CIC perceives to have just stayed in Canada long enough to technically qualify for citizenship, and applied-on-the-way-to-the-airport, yeah, it appears that CIC elevates the scrutiny considerably and that entails a much longer timeline.

What I said there is consistent with what amounts to a warning I offer in this forum often: those who, while the application is pending, are living or working abroad (or otherwise abroad for such an extended period of time that CIC would perceive that to be living abroad), are risking elevated scrutiny and a much much longer timeline.

This does not amount to an policy to pause or suspend processing indefinitely if CIC ascertains the applicant is abroad . . . even though, in some respects the practical effect is akin to an indefinite pause.

The link posted by EasyRider appears to be to an observation made by akella, interpreting internal CIC emails:

akella wrote: They [CIC] were thinking of holding (suspending processing) of CIT apps for clients with address outside of Canada (p.0008)

While it is not entirely clear why akella inferred that CIC was thinking about suspending processing of citizenship applications for clients with abroad addresses, this appears to be derived from a August 7, 2012 email from a local office (undisclosed) to the National office, where it states:

Some time ago, the field was advised to hold citizenship applications from clients whos address was outside Canada pending a policy decision on how they would be handled. Has this policy decision been made? If so, please forward me the response. If not, do you know when it is expected as we have many files with long-term BSs on them for this reason. emphasis added

There is no further discussion regarding this in that batch of internal CIC communications. In any event, putting some applications on a temporary hold pending a formal policy decision regarding how to process those applications, does not indicate a policy of placing abroad applicants on hold indefinitely.

Of course it is difficult to discern what the particular practices or policies were, regarding this, but there is NO hint in this that CIC was considering a policy to indefinitely place abroad applicants on hold.

Indeed, as Vancan2012 further observed, it is probably not even legal for CIC, as a policy, to put abroad applicants on an indefinite hold.

While many here may have the idea that CIC will deliberately disregard, if not outright flaunt the legalities, to pursue some agenda, no, that is not much likely. Sure, we see CIC dancing with the technicalities (for example, its approach to evaluating residency is not consistent with the Federal Court rulings, but CIC's approach to evaluating residency is not governed directly by the Citizenship Act and never reviewed by the Federal Court; it is only the Citizenship Judge's determination in individual specific cases which must be based on the Act's requirements and which is reviewable by the Federal Court). But no, so far as the available information shows, CIC does not have overtly illegal policies. And no, so far as I have seen, there are no internal CIC documents indicating that processing for abroad applicants is paused indefinitely. But it may take so long for such applicants it seems that way.

Hi All