Travel Records in and out of Canada and USA

Here are 2 links to get your travel records from the US side for entries to the US (CBP - customs and border patrol) - it is very important that before your signature, the words "Signed under penalty of perjury" are written (thanks to Sivan for pointing that out):

Edited by rrmaron - 28 May 2011 at 2:45pm

Hi,

I received US CBP records (TECS and ATS entries) in response to my privacy request. It took close to 2 months to get the response (mine is not a expedited request). Some of this delay may be from my side as my initial request was not a "perfected request" - ie.. I did not include "perjury" statement which I had to submit again and hence some delay in processing the request.  Even though, they claim backlog of up to 4 months, process seems to be not that bad!
---

I have few queries with regard to the TECS (entry in to US records). Could anyone in receipt of their CBP records, please respond to my queries below:

1. One of my road crossing via foot (as a pedestrian) in to US is not appearing in the TECS report. [My Canadian friend dropped me on the Canadian side of the border and my relative picked me on the US side of the border after I crossed as a pedestrian. If you are wondering why I did this, as it was faster and easier for my Canadian friend/US relative from border crossing/waiting hassles!]

Has anyone had this experience on some of their trips missing in their CBP response?

This trip is critical for me as this will prove my first absence - start date after landing as PR. Before I write to CBP, I was wondering if any of the members had experience in this regard - follow-up request for missing records/complaints?

2. I recently traveled to Seattle from Vancouver via Amtrak Train service. Both my entry in to US and exit from US dates are listed in the TECS record.  I am not sure why my exit date from US (ie.. return to Canada date ) is also listed. Does anyone know why this is the case?

Thanks very much.

Thanks
Sivan

Thanks very much dpenabill.

dpenabill wrote: As for 2: I am not sure, but this information may have been populated from the Amtrak passenger manifest. Taking commercial rail across the border is very similar to flying internationally, and the carriers are obligated to provide passenger lists to the respective border control authorities. In any event, it is not an anomaly, nothing to worry about, just one more item of information.

Sivan: As you have indicated, may be there is a process for Amtrak to share passenger manifest. Not sure though.
When I boarded the train in Seattle, there was no Custom/Border check. Passport/PR card was manually checked by the Train Conductor (no scanning) -- just verification of identity/travel documents. CBSA check happens at Vancouver when we exit from the train.

dpenabill wrote: Finally, and overall: It should be remembered that such records are NOT definitive but only evidentiary, meaning they indicate a cross border trip but are not conclusive, and they are particularly not conclusive about where the individual was the day before or the day after. In other words, such records provide information which can and when presented will be compared to all the other information in an applicant's case, and is subject to such reasonable inferences as the examining officer might make. I have oft times emphasized that how all the individual parts fit together makes a huge difference. If the pieces do not fit together into a coherent picture, that is going to draw attention and scrutiny and, if significant discrepancies appear, doubts. When all the pieces fit, when the records corroborate the applicant's disclosures, a bureaucrat will be happy -- that is actually a lot less work for the bureaucrat.

Sivan: I have nothing against the CIC process evaluating applicant's application in totality. Having said that, the timing/sequencing of the process could be better.

When an application is submitted, we are expected to provide "work/education history, residential address history, residency calculation/absences" in the last 4 years. I reckon these 3 are the key items that are available for CO while assessing the application ( + background check?) to arrive at "how all the individual parts fit together".   [May be I am missing something. I am not sure what other information CO has  'to assess' the application for residency evaluation.]

This process on an average takes close to 12 months and then when the applicant is called for test,  the applicant is given only few minutes to explain the absences --- with reference to the stampings in the passport.

[Note: Most of the road trips in to Canada are not stamped in the Passport (or) sometimes not even scanned (there by no record even with CBSA Privacy request).  I am not sure how the applicant can convince the CO if there are questions during the test interview in relation to a declared absence.]

So, if the CO has a doubt about the residency requirement during the test, the dreaded RQ (Lite or Full) is issued forcing the applicant's processing time to extend anywhere from --- few months to years based on region/city, Lite or Full RQ etc.

I reckon, if CIC's way of validating the declared absences are only by looking at the Passport stamp, they could very well ask the applicant to provide passport stamp photocopies during initial submission. This will allow the CO (probably at the local office) to look at the application details along with the passport stampings for residency evaluation much before the test day. If the CO is not completely satisfied and wants additional proof, they could ask the applicant to provide those details even before the applicant is called for test.

This is just my take on the process. There could be multiple procedural reasons, availability of staff, SLAs for CIC for not using this approach.  As you have mentioned in other posts, ( no. of RQ cases are very very small compared to the total number of applications processed), I agree that CIC's process may be tailored to support majority of the applicants and not towards the minority RQ applicants.  However, there should be some possibility for CIC to improvise their process towards this minority RQ applicants :---  CIC would very well know in the earlier phase of the application scrutiny whether the application needs to be classified as a RQ case or not. At least for these cases, they could ask for additional documentation to prove residence much earlier in the process rather than close the test day/post test stage to reduce the cycle time.

As Passport stamps (lack of thereof) combined with CBSA/CBP records (with inconsistent scanning ritual at POEs) are not going to show a complete picture to prove every declared absence, In my personal opinion, only way one could prove  presence/residence in Canada - day before absence start date and day after absence end date, is to be judicious to make Credit card transactions and keep receipts, have medical appointments or other life events on these pre/post absence day(s) that can be proved with documentary evidence. If I would known the complexities of residency proof earlier in my PR life (I agree the onus is on the applicant), I would have avoided most of the US trips and would have planned to have one transaction/life event per day totaling 1095 days.

Enough of my ranting I guess! Are there any goodies/funding in yesterday's budget that will help CIC to have more staff/Citizenship Judges to reduce the overall processing time!


PS: Not sure if I have diluted the essence of "rrmaron" intentions with this thread being a ready reckoner for members to get CBP/CBSA records. If rrmaron and members feel that way, we could move today's posts/responses in this thread to "RQ discussion" thread.

Thanks
Sivan