Additional documents |
Post Reply |
Author | ||
123smike
Junior Member Joined: 21 Feb 2013 Status: Offline Points: 147 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: 15 Jul 2013 at 9:10pm |
|
I have recived letter to give last 4 years addresses...I think I gave all the addresses in the application, any indication as to what is happening ??
Vancouver Applied jan 2013 in process jan 2013 Additional documents July 2013 Edited by 123smike - 23 Jul 2013 at 2:43pm |
||
dpenabill
Top Member Joined: 29 Nov 2009 Status: Offline Points: 6407 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
One -- I assume application was June 2012 not 2013. Beyond that, hard to figure this out assuming this request came from the local CIC office processing your citizenship application. First, all of the communications and sources of information from CIC since OB 407 was issued indicate that as a matter of policy and practice CIC local offices are no longer going to be making particular information or document requests like this. If it was determined that additional information or documentation should be requested, the local office is to use RQ, no other form of request. Thus, while we saw this sort of request often before the spring of 2012, this is now highly unusual. Moreover, the form of the request is unusual. When CIC local offices were making particular requests like this, the request would almost always be the period beginning four years prior to the date of applying, and to present. Not just the "last four years." In contrast, it could be a request that CBSA might make. Or, I suppose, the RCMP. But, if it was CBSA my sense is that it would more likely be a request for such information for the last five years, not four (five years being the relevant time frame for the PR residency obligation). That said, I am not sure who would make the request if it was part of a fraud investigation (as opposed to CIC processing the citizenship application); that said, at the least I would expect the request to be either for at least five years, or it would be for the period of time beginning four years prior to applying for citizenship and to the present. So, it is a bit of a conundrum. A key factor to consider is just who made this request. As I said, my sense is that CIC no longer does this attendant processing citizenship applicants; it is RQ or nothing. (Well there are other potential requests, like a fingerprint request, but I am referring to any request for information relevant to residency.) |
||
Bureaucracy is what bureaucracy does, or When in doubt, follow the instructions. Otherwise, follow the instructions.
BTW: Not an expert, not a Can. lawyer, never worked in immigration |
||
SuperCan
Junior Member Joined: 27 Jun 2013 Status: Offline Points: 32 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Did you get the letter from CPC-Sydney or your local office?
Edited by SuperCan - 16 Jul 2013 at 1:43am |
||
123smike
Junior Member Joined: 21 Feb 2013 Status: Offline Points: 147 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
it is 2013.. my case is 100% genuine..there is not even a single day or information which is wrong in the application..
Edited by 123smike - 23 Jul 2013 at 2:44pm |
||
123smike
Junior Member Joined: 21 Feb 2013 Status: Offline Points: 147 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
I just recieved the letter not sent anything
|
||
dpenabill
Top Member Joined: 29 Nov 2009 Status: Offline Points: 6407 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Even more curious that the request would come from CPC-Sydney, at all, and that it comes six months after your case is "in process" -- particularly since that means (1) your file passed the completeness screening, and (2) most likely would have been transferred to the local office, unless . . . well I do not really know what exceptions there would be other than a file still in queue for the level one screening (to identify applicants to be issued pre-test RQ), and while that is a possibility it hardly seems the likely answer. You would be the first one here to report (as best I have kept track) that CPC-Sydney level one screening was engaged in making further inquiries of the applicant in this manner, and frankly that would, again, be uncharacteristic of what we have seen of the OB 407 process (which other information from CIC has affirmed that RQ is to be the only way additional documents relevant to residency are requested).
And the curiousness of the time frame for the request ("last four years") remains. In particular, there have been NO other reports of CPC-Sydney engaging in this sort of additional request, and no hint in the OBs or Operational Manuals or other information obtained from CIC, that this would be an approach employed by CPC-Sydney. Seems well out of the mainstream to me. Please keep us posted as to how this goes. (Note: I really do not know what is behind this, but if I was to guess, I'd guess it was some sort of investigation outside the mainstream citizenship application processing track, such as an investigation for possible residence fraud (not all who are investigated committed fraud, obviously); but even that would not explain why the request comes from CPC-Sydney, since I would expect that to come from a local office as well, or from CBSA or the RCMP.) |
||
Bureaucracy is what bureaucracy does, or When in doubt, follow the instructions. Otherwise, follow the instructions.
BTW: Not an expert, not a Can. lawyer, never worked in immigration |
||
123smike
Junior Member Joined: 21 Feb 2013 Status: Offline Points: 147 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
I have the cbsa 3 years information, it says how many exists I had..and it clearly shows my presence of 1100 days in Canada..I have all the rental agreements etc..
|
||
123smike
Junior Member Joined: 21 Feb 2013 Status: Offline Points: 147 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
I think it is the incomplete address information.. I beleilve that is the issue..see another thread similar to mine
Edited by 123smike - 16 Jul 2013 at 1:34pm |
||
dpenabill
Top Member Joined: 29 Nov 2009 Status: Offline Points: 6407 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
It is not clear from that discussion whether the request, in that instance, came from the local office or Sydney, but the timeline suggests it came from the local office. From your timeline I would have guessed similarly albeit with less confidence (over a year since app was "in process" in that case, compared to six months in yours). It is clear, however, that the reason for the request in that case was the applicant's failure to provide addresses for the full four years prior to applying (as specifically instructed in the application), but rather that individual did not report address abroad prior to landing notwithstanding it was within the four year time frame. In contrast, your query asserts you provided all addresses as instructed. The other contrast is that in the other instance, the request for address information was very specific, clearly requesting information that applicant did not provide (I copy the post below for reference here). Your query indicates the request is for the "last four years." If what underlies the request in your case is that, indeed, similar to the other case, you failed to include all address information for the full four years prior to the date of applying, that probably does explain why you got this request and, probably, it is not that big a deal (but for the impact relative to heightened scrutiny and some delay as I explain in my response to waleedhk). That said, the contrasts remain, and if you did declare all addresses for the full four years prior to applying, that would indicate something else is going on. Please keep us posted. For reference and comparison:
Note: in the other topic I thanked waleedhk for the post because, indeed, sometimes it is good to have such reminders about just how important it is to follow the instructions, and particularly to not second-guess what CIC wants -- waleedhk assumed that time prior to coming to Canada was NOT relevant so did not include it; CIC in contrast has explicitly stated that it considers any information requested to be relevant. At times I have been criticized for, in essence, approaching questions in a dumbing-down fashion, emphasizing the obvious, like emphasizing the need to follow the instructions. But, in following this stuff for years, and in my experience overall going back decades, the overall number one source of problems in bureaucratic processes is the extent to which many, many people fail to follow the instructions. From what I have observed the admonition to follow the instructions is something that cannot be repeated too often, that cannot be overemphasized. |
||
Bureaucracy is what bureaucracy does, or When in doubt, follow the instructions. Otherwise, follow the instructions.
BTW: Not an expert, not a Can. lawyer, never worked in immigration |
||
Post Reply | |
Tweet |
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |