PR Card Issue
Printed From: Canada Immigration and Visa Discussion Forum
Category: Canada Immigration Topics
Forum Name: Preserving Permanent Residence Status
Forum Description: How long can a permanent resident remain outside of Canada? Commentaries on preserving permanent residence.
URL: https://secure.immigration.ca/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=14334
Printed Date: 22 Jun 2024 at 10:39pm
Topic: PR Card Issue
Posted By: Albert41
Subject: PR Card Issue
Date Posted: 03 Nov 2013 at 11:06pm
|
Hi All, I have a very sensitive issue here. Due to personal situation i did not need to travel outside of Canada for the last 7 years. Never applied for a PR card before. My old proof of landing was lost and replaced at the time with certified by CIS copy. The problem is. They need an original. Also they are asking to provide me with a last 5 years of my tax return which is fine but i only have assessments for the last 4 years. I need to travel soon due to my fathers illness and have to apply for a travel document which can not be issued without PR card. Took some legal advise and was told that i have to have 2 affidavits one of which should be signed by someone who knows me before i came to Canada (which is 11 years ago) My question is what can be done to get a PR card as quickly as possible. All help will be greatly appreciated. |
Replies:
Posted By: greeny
Date Posted: 04 Nov 2013 at 12:24am
for assessments you can get them all online, just register with revenue canada and they will send you a password within 4 -5days, you can go to your account and print assessments for 5years as for you landing document, I didn;t catch - you have a legal copy just restored , right? as I can remember there is nothing said it must be an original if you can proof that your trip is very urgent and have a real reason, they usually do it in 3 weeks, just look at urgent processing or smth like this at cic website, for sure you have to have a proof of your flight payment partial or full. ------------- landed: May, 2003 applied: Dec04,2009 test/RQ: Feb15,2011 st.clair 2nd RQ: Aug 2014 Total waiting time to oath: 60,5 months :)= 5 years and 14 days oath- Dec , 2014 |
Albert41 wrote:Posted By: Albert41
Date Posted: 04 Nov 2013 at 12:29am
|
Hi, Thank you very much for your reply. I will check it with revenue Canada tomorrow. And yes i have a copy of my landing. Just realized it a copy of a certified copy.
|
Posted By: dpenabill
Date Posted: 04 Nov 2013 at 12:38am
|
Note: topic moved here, to the Preserving Permanent Residence conference, from the Citizenship conference.
I assume you have visited the relevant CIC web pages. But if you have not, see http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/information/pr-card/index.asp - http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/information/pr-card/index.asp this CIC page about obtaining a permanent resident card, and follow links to relevant information. Also see, in particular, this page: http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/information/pr-card/apply-first-pr-card.asp - http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/information/pr-card/apply-first-pr-card.asp However, it appears that at least consulting with a lawyer is probably a good idea. If you have already, follow the lawyer's advice. A forum like this cannot offer better or more reliable information or advice than that provided by a licensed, experienced lawyer. My sense is that you do not have a passport, and thus you need a "travel document" recognized as such internationally, that you need this to submit with the application for a PR card and you will need it in order to travel to destinations outside Canada. To be clear, that is different from a PR travel document which PRs abroad apply for if they do not have a PR card and need authorization in order to board a flight destined for Canada, that is, in order to return to Canada. That is only good for travel to Canada. The process for obtaining the PR card, for an individual who can provide the documents required which are largely about proving identity and compliance with the residency obligation, is relatively simple. For someone without a passport, obtaining a passport or travel document can be a major hurdle in establishing identity. I believe there are alternative ways to do this. But, I also think it would be best to have a lawyer help you actually do this. In order to travel outside Canada you will need a passport or internationally recognized travel document regardless of whether you have a Canadian PR card (at least usually -- the Canadian PR card is not a "travel document" recognized as such by most other countries). All the Canadian PR card accomplishes is being able to board a flight destined for Canada from a place outside Canada. Sorry to hear about your father's illness. It really can be tough being separated not just by many miles but by the formalities imposed for crossing borders. ------------- 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 |
Posted By: eileen
Date Posted: 13 Nov 2013 at 1:06pm
|
This is not in answer to the original post, but it is related to the subject, so I thought I'd try to avoid the endless proliferation of new topics for related questions. Has anyone had any experiences with delayed delivery of a renewed PR card? My application for renewal was approved 6 weeks ago. CIC website and call center says that cards will be delivered (or available for pick up) within 4 weeks. I've gotten no word. Last week I contacted the Call Centre. They said they'd send an inquiry but they couldn't tell me if a notice had been sent to me (and lost or delayed in the mail). Let me know if any others have experienced similar situations. I know it's probably just a hiccup, but of course, unexplained delays are concerning. ------------- Resources for Future Canadians & their Advocates: http://residencequestionnaire.wordpress.com - http://residencequestionnaire.wordpress.com |
Posted By: canuck25
Date Posted: 13 Nov 2013 at 1:33pm
| Yeah - mine was delayed for whatever reason. I waited and waited but had to travel so used my old one to re-enter the country (it had not expired yet at that point). Upon landing I was diverted into a CBPA office where they inquired why I entered on an "old" card. Apparently the new one arrived while I was travelling and was waiting for me at home. |
Posted By: dpenabill
Date Posted: 13 Nov 2013 at 2:19pm
Foremost, as best I understand things, there is NO cause for concern, not as yet anyway (and, actually, worst case scenario is having to visit the local office, present some documents such as ID and passport, answer a few perfunctory questions, and then given your new PR card -- techncially you could be referred for a residency examination but that would be extremely unlikely unless there is overt evidence you have made misrepresentations as to presence). Unfortunately we do not have a lot of reports about the process involved in renewing PR cards, and the current process, pursuant to which the card is routinely mailed to most PRs, is actually a fairly recent change (time flies and I do not recall specifically, but no more than a year and a half or so ago all PRs had to go to the local office to obtain the PR card in person, after being notified that it was available). The experience reported by canuck25 is similar to experiences reported by others. Also see, if you can find them, posts incuding reports of personal experience by jogruni. I think the information you have simply reflects that Sydney has approved the issuance of the new PR card. The new card has to be physically issued as well, and that will ordinarily be mailed directly to you, but it may be mailed (referred, transferred) to the local office. The few reports we have had here have indicated that it is not uncommon for PRs to see a status in eCas, or be told something by a call centre representative, indicating they would have to pick up the card from the local office, only to next get the PR card in the mail, not a notice to pick it up. So, there is no reason to worry as yet. Additionally, because CIC's mailing practices are less than optimal, it is not uncommon for GCMS to reflect that something has been mailed when actually it is still just in a queue to be mailed. But, the information you have does not even yet indicate it has been mailed; there may be some additional delay involved between the date of issuance and the date of mailing, and again, the "date of mailing" may reflect the date the item goes into a queue to be mailed and the actually mailing will follow, and the time involved in this tends to be longer than what most would expect. Frustrating: yes. Of course I do not really know, but my sense is that when the call centre says that the card will be "delivered" that is likely to mean the date it will be mailed as opposed to actually delivered, which again is probably the date it is queued to be mailed, actual date of entering the mail system to follow. Moreover, as many have seen, such timelines indicated by CIC are often understated estimates. If the card is not mailed to you directly, while it technically should be physically in the local office not much longer than the time they state, the few reports we have seen about this suggest that it will not be available for you to pick-up that soon. Even if you have to go to the local office to pick it up in person, that should not be a big deal. It would not surprise me that PRs who happen to also have a citizenship application in process are randomly selected to have to appear in person to pick up new PR cards, just as a quality control measure. One caveat/caution: PR cards are not mailed to any address other than the PR's residential address. CIC does look for indications that an address being used is that of a third party (including, for example, family or friend, or representatives authorized or not) and not the PR's actual residential address. PR cards will not be mailed to a P.O. Box. For more information in this regard, see the various operational bulletins issued this year and last: -- Operational Bulletin 536 – July 30, 2013 -- Operational Bulletin 491 - January 14, 2013 -- Operational Bulletin 412 - April 27, 2012 ------------- 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 |
Posted By: eileen
Date Posted: 13 Nov 2013 at 5:53pm
|
Thanks to Canuck25 and Dpenabill. As ever, the lack of accountability is frustrating. The timeliness of PR card delivery isn't a huge issue, but it is a reminder to me of the CIC's uncanny ability to introduce unnecessary uncertainty into the lives of clients. ------------- Resources for Future Canadians & their Advocates: http://residencequestionnaire.wordpress.com - http://residencequestionnaire.wordpress.com |
Posted By: eileen
Date Posted: 19 Nov 2013 at 11:41am
|
Update: I received a letter from CIC yesterday telling me to report in person to CIC on Nov. 26 in order to receive my PR card. Timeline: Applied: 26 July Decision made: 4 Oct Called CIC (inquired about status of my card since ecas states that cards or letters will be sent within 4 weeks of decision being made): 8 Nov Letter sent: 15 Nov Appt at CIC: 26 Nov ------------- Resources for Future Canadians & their Advocates: http://residencequestionnaire.wordpress.com - http://residencequestionnaire.wordpress.com |
Posted By: RussCan
Date Posted: 19 Nov 2013 at 2:08pm
|
They mail it to you novadays. The request to come in person means they want to interview you. |
Posted By: eileen
Date Posted: 19 Nov 2013 at 2:16pm
|
Most people get it by mail, but not all. I have a friend who has been a PR for 40 years who mentioned he's had to go pick his PR card up in person a few times, but he didn't feel like it was that big a deal. I wonder if most RQ-recipients are requested to come in person? ------------- Resources for Future Canadians & their Advocates: http://residencequestionnaire.wordpress.com - http://residencequestionnaire.wordpress.com |
Posted By: RussCan
Date Posted: 19 Nov 2013 at 2:22pm
|
right. this is what their web site says:
If you have filled out your application properly and meet all the requirements, we will mail your card to you. We will only mail PR cards to residential addresses in Canada. In some cases, we may ask you to pick up your card at a local office. If so, bring your passport and the original documents you sent when you applied. |
Posted By: EasyRider
Date Posted: 19 Nov 2013 at 2:26pm
|
I picked up my PR card in Montreal in person couple years ago, it didn't feel like an interview. Agent just verified my documents and gave me an envelope with a card. I don't why it was required, maybe they have to follow this protocol in certain cases.
------------- https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0At5U1gEsWR9CdEo1OXNzdDlQR3NGV2Z5YlBQZVJMVXc - Montreal Citizenship Timelines |
Posted By: RussCan
Date Posted: 19 Nov 2013 at 2:28pm
| They did not use to mail renewed PR cards a cople years ago. Everyone used to have to come to pick them up back then. |
Posted By: harrymann
Date Posted: 19 Nov 2013 at 3:00pm
|
i picked up my p.r card march 2011 in vancouver office. it was like simple id verification and handling the card like they do in the banks. |
Posted By: natnat
Date Posted: 19 Nov 2013 at 3:30pm
| in person pick up is a way cic try to see wether you are physically present in canada other than mail it to you and your family member may courier to you, cic must found out lots of ppl did that and change their protocol, especially if the person been travel abroad or in the process of a citizenship, just my thought. |
Posted By: greeny
Date Posted: 19 Nov 2013 at 4:06pm
5 years ago , they just mailed it to me, now I'm waiting again, we'll see what happens this time, I'll let you know. ------------- landed: May, 2003 applied: Dec04,2009 test/RQ: Feb15,2011 st.clair 2nd RQ: Aug 2014 Total waiting time to oath: 60,5 months :)= 5 years and 14 days oath- Dec , 2014 |
Posted By: dpenabill
Date Posted: 19 Nov 2013 at 5:32pm
|
Ditto most responses above. During the pilot project phase, last year (2012), when CIC was implementing the practice of mailing most PR cards directly to the PR, the applicable Operational Bulletin (OB 424) indicated that 10% of applicants (for a new PR card)
We do not know the long-term percentage to be randomly selected, but my best guess is that it is still 10% although perhaps a bit less. And, of course, some may be selected based on criteria that CIC is not likely to share with the public (OB 424 is not shared with the public even -- see discussion below about counter-referrals). When the PR is required to appear in person, technically it is an interview, including a documents check, but as many of the above posts suggest, it is ordinarily perfunctory, verification of identity, sometimes just a couple questions, perhaps a few questions, which in large part is, as suggested, simply verification of identity and that the PR is physically present in Canada (which could be due to certain criteria or a random quality control measure). It may not feel like an interview because it is so brief, perfunctory, even to a degree quite casual, although of course all contacts with CIC or CBSA for that matter are formal and even the most casual questions are deliberate and part of the officer's formal inquiries. That is: this is almost always, indeed, no big deal. But, it does involve a request for presentation of the PR's original documents and, as I quoted from OB 424 above, it is an opportunity CIC takes to verify compliance with the requirements. So, again, usually this is a formality, and from the appearance of things for eileen, it seems quite likely this will indeed be the perfunctory, casual, no big deal version. That said, that is not necessarily how it goes for all PRs who are required to pick-up the new card in person (rather than it being mailed). There is (almost certainly) a GCMS/FOSS check, which inherently includes in effect a RCMP name-record check, conducted by the local office before the date and time of the appointment (or perhaps done during the time the PR is in the local office), which for some might involve a flag for this or that issue. In particular, some PRs may have been flagged for CBSA to, in essence, tag (make a NCB) upon the individual's arrival returning to Canada from abroad, and any such NCB will examined as part of the GCMS check. If the NCB raises a concern, that is explicitly one of the checklist items as a reason for a "counter-referral." In particular, the CIC personnel conducting the interview attendant delivery of the PR card (for those required to pick it up in person) have a checklist of items pursuant to which they are screening PRs, and in one of the enumerated circumstances what is called a counter-referral will be triggered, pursuant to which the PR card probably will not be delivered to the applicant, the local office then requests the physical file from Sydney and, presumably thereafter proceeds with an inquiry, residency examination, investigation, or such. The appendix to Operational Bulletin 424 (May 29, 2012) consisting of a "File Request Email Template" is largely the checklist of "reasons for counter referral," when "further investigation is required following a front counter review during in-person distribution of PR card." This OB was discussed in the forum here in some detail during the summer of 2012, but I do not recall which topic that was in. OB-424 was only briefly accessible by the public and then removed from public access.
I presume this was the original PR card sent to you following landing and becoming a PR. Applications for a new or replacement PR card were not being mailed to the individual five years ago, and in fact not before May of 2012. ------------- 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 |
Posted By: dpenabill
Date Posted: 19 Nov 2013 at 5:35pm
|
I overlooked the date you say you landed greeny, and so it appears you are reporting that CIC mailed you a replacement/new PR card five years. Sorry, but given CIC practices at that time, this is not a credible report. I am guessing your memory is mistaken or you are thinking about your original PR card. ------------- 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 |
Posted By: dpenabill
Date Posted: 19 Nov 2013 at 5:54pm
|
For reference, some relevant parts of OB 424:
------------- 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 |
Posted By: eileen
Date Posted: 19 Nov 2013 at 8:03pm
|
Thanks for passing that along dpenabill. Regarding randomness, I make it a habit not to believe officials or security agents when they declare that further checks are "random". While some portion may be random, I highly doubt that all, or even a majority are. I will be interested to hear more RQ recipients' experiences with PR card renewal. I will update again after November 26th. I hope to avoid the counter-referral, but we'll see. It depends how they define "extensive travel" and whether my previous unemployment and maternity leave is still counting against me. ------------- Resources for Future Canadians & their Advocates: http://residencequestionnaire.wordpress.com - http://residencequestionnaire.wordpress.com |
Posted By: Justice4B
Date Posted: 20 Nov 2013 at 6:31pm
eileen: I'd like to share my experience from July 2011. I went through a formal name-change (ON, Gazetted) process in late Dec 2010, which necessitated PR Card name-change also. I went through the formalities of doing this, and after following up by phone learned that the PR card was ready and a letter had been sent to me in the mail. 2-3 weeks later, no letter arrived in the mail, so I called to follow up, only to be insistently told that the "letter is in the mail". Shortly, after my last call to CIC, I went with my spouse as a "Walk-In" customer, letting the receptionist know what it was about. I did not have a problem with the walk-in (i.e., I was not refused a meting with one of the agents, because I did not have that 'Letter' in hand). So, upon hearing my name, I went to the window and a female agent helped me. My spouse stood next to me, and there was no objection. Mind you, the PR Card was already issued -- no issues with 'residency' (requirements not fulfilled, or the like). She asked me if I had brought in my PP. I explained I only walked-in to check about the missing letter, and I did not know if I was supposed to bring in my PP (or if that was even mentioned in the letter that I did not have at the time). She asked me if I had undertaken any travel, and I said I had. That's when she got visibly flustered ('travel' is a word that throws most of these agents into an unexplained frenzy, as we know by now  ....be it phone, interview, whatever).The agent began to behave as if she were not going to give the PR card to me, putting it aside, asking me questions as to how does she know whether I have been living in Canada or not? At that point, I just non-nonchalantly said something like "but, I know I have been living here, and I have been diligently following the requirements of the IRPA, because I value my PR status. I also said, I have recorded each exit and entry/back. I remarked that this is likely why the PR card has been 'renewed'. I am sorry, but I am one of those blunt immigrants who just speaks in a matter-of-fact manner, even if its prima-facie challenging authority. In this case, it was not challenging anyone's authority, rather than questioning an action which could result in holding onto my PR Card for no rhyme or reason. I can understand if that letter in the mail said to come in for an interview (but no, that missing letter was telling me to collect the renewed PR Card!). So why all this back-n-forth, triggered by that word? 'travel'! THIS WAS NOT A RENEWAL OF PR CARD. THIS WAS A REQUEST FOR NEW CARD UPON CHANGE OF NAME. I quickly offered to go bring my PP in (even it meant 1 1/2 hours of drive back & forth). At that point, Lord knows what happened: the lady just brought back the PR Card from this 'other secure position'  and re-checked my ID, and handed me my new PR Card. I'd like to conclude that the "come to get the Card" letter was based on my nationality, but I'd rather not speculate online, despite sufficient reasons to believe so. As for the letter itself, it came 2 weeks after I got the PR Card from St. Clair office. It's on yellow paper, while the copy of the same letter I got while visiting St.Clair office was white. My advice to you would be to take your CBSA Travel records and PP(s) with Exit/Entry records (spare copies). Maybe your letter already calls for that? Remember, anyone who is vocal about immigration issues in general, and about the RQ situation in particular, is bound to get a hard time. I know of couple of cases of extreme harassment (and/or retaliation) to 'vocal' PRs, which ended up being 'fixed' once clients engaged a lawyer, or went to Court ---but that is a whole different topic. Good luck on Nov 26th! P.S. anyone commenting on my reply-post, please understand this has been MY EXPERIENCE
|
Posted By: Spellbound
Date Posted: 20 Nov 2013 at 7:23pm
|
I was RQ'd in September 2012, and earlier this year I had to replace my PR-card as the old one expired. No issues, but they told me to come in person to grab the card (St. Clair - it's 100 km away from where I live) - for some reason they probably still didn't believe I was in the country. The clerk at St. clair was very polite and professional, I had no issues at all. |
Posted By: greeny
Date Posted: 21 Nov 2013 at 12:45am
how long did it take ? just curious as I've just sent mine
 NOI landed in may 2003 and became PR 5 years ago it was my 1st renewal now the 2nd is in process  ------------- landed: May, 2003 applied: Dec04,2009 test/RQ: Feb15,2011 st.clair 2nd RQ: Aug 2014 Total waiting time to oath: 60,5 months :)= 5 years and 14 days oath- Dec , 2014 |
Posted By: dpenabill
Date Posted: 21 Nov 2013 at 3:20am
Understood. And the reference to ten percent being randomly selected is specifically about the pilot project phase. For ongoing quality control purposes, after the completion of the pilot project phase, a much smaller percentage would be sufficient, but what it is in practice I do not know. I certainly agree that references to a random selection for any additional processing is likely to be in addition to those identified for the additional processing based on cause (from CIC's perspective -- most likely based on specified criteria). I trust, though, that if they say ten percent are selected for in-person pick-up, there was probably a ten percent selection for in-person pick-up, but that that was in addition to others selected for other reasons. (Or issued residency questionnaires.) That is, there is no reason to think that just because a certain percentage are randomly selected to pick up the PR card in person, that is exclusive, as in others are probably selected as well, based on criteria (noting that there are more than a few OBs we have not been able to see). Indeed, one would certainly expect CIC to impose additional requirements on any PR for whom questions, doubts, issues, or such are perceived. As for how it goes, at the time the PR shows up, there is, obviously, the profound contrast between the experience reported by Justice4B and that reported by Spellbound. Hopefully yours is more akin to that reported by Spellbound. Since you have a citizenhip application in process, and have submitted a response to a RQ, CIC's requiring an in-person pick-up strikes me as either random or a due diligence practice (given that you have been issued RQ in the citizenhip application process) which should not be problematic unless there is a specific residency fraud issue lurking in your case, or a recent FOSS NCB, or a poison letter. I can readily understand you being somewhat gun-shy at this stage (so to say). And of course I can offer no guarantees. And I have to acknowledge that there are some cases which unfold as disagreeably as that reported by Justice4B. Still, though, odds are if your qualifications are in order, it should go more the way Spellbound describes. In one way or another, in a few days you will see how it goes. In addition to hoping it goes well, your report about that will be much appreciated. ------------- 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 |
Posted By: Spellbound
Date Posted: 21 Nov 2013 at 7:13pm
how long did it take ? just curious as I've just sent mine |
Posted By: greeny
Date Posted: 21 Nov 2013 at 8:15pm
thank , I called CIC today and they said they've just started to open in-September-sent applications  ------------- landed: May, 2003 applied: Dec04,2009 test/RQ: Feb15,2011 st.clair 2nd RQ: Aug 2014 Total waiting time to oath: 60,5 months :)= 5 years and 14 days oath- Dec , 2014 |
Posted By: eileen
Date Posted: 26 Nov 2013 at 12:14pm
After much sturm und drang, including a quasi (?) counter referral, I received my PR card today. Here is my colour commentary. 8h20: Arrive at 1010 St-Antoine O. reception, show invitation for 8h30 PR card pickup appointment. Take elevator to second floor (elevator has a warning label: "espace clos/enclosed space", which seems rather obvious). As I wait with my husband (who is Canadian and even wearing a tie for the occasion) approximately ten other people or groups are called up to counter, where they receive their PR cards after showing their passports and landing papers. Pretty soon it's clear that we have been waiting longer than anyone else. 9h10: Called to counter, counter agent apologizes for wait. Asks for my current and expired passport. Does not release PR card. As I wait with husband (dear citizen) maybe 8 more people are called to counter where they get their PR cards. One Asian family and two Eastern European women seem to not get their cards right away and have to wait. Some others are called for meetings with agents, who, inexplicably, mostly wear navy coloured cargo pants and polo shirts. Are they RCMP? CBSA? Does CIC have a quasi-military dress code on Tuesdays? There is a room where two translators knit, drink coffee and look through notebooks. 9h50: Called to counter. My passports are handed back. The counter agent says "I am sorry for the wait. You are not getting your card today. You can come back next day? Or we send letter? You not get your PR card. Wait, let me get your address?" She walks off to look for a pen (she needs my address??!) My husband, who is unappreciative of this opaque process and the feeling that my rights are being withheld and his impinged due to secret accusations, has spent the last half hour formulating demands for action and resolution in his head to Justin Trudeau. He says "No, no, no! We're staying. We're not leaving. We want to talk to someone." Counter agent says we can wait, that they haven't forgotten us, but that I won't get the card and she has no idea how long it will take to talk to someone. She cannot or will not tell me why they won't issue my card to me. 10h40: A woman with red hair carrying a thick (ish) file speaks to counter agent. 10h45: I am called to counter. She has a clipboard for my signature with "PR card receipt signature" or something printed at top. She tells me they've decided to issue the card. I ask her why. She cannot say. I ask her what the issue was before. She cannot say. We take the card and start walking out. 10h47: I realize that she didn't ask for my old PR card, which I think she was supposed to do. I freak out a bit thinking that somehow the CIC is going to punish me for still having my old card. We return to the counter and she apologizes, says she is just too busy and thanks me for letting her know. She takes the card and says, "yes, we have to destroy them". 10h50: Not sure what happened to the Asian family waiting, or even really what they were waiting for, but the two Eastern European women are still there when we leave. Walking out there are three men at the entrance negotiating with the security guard, saying "There's no way we can get in? We really need to talk to someone." and the security guard telling them there is 100% no way that is happening. 10h52: I regret two things. 1) The photo on my new PR card is not flattering. My old one was nice. 2) I didn't get to speak with the actual agent (the redhead?). I was hoping I might get some hint about the delay on my citizenship application by way of the delay on my PR card issuance. But, to my eyes, this is still a black box agency with black box processes. ------------- Resources for Future Canadians & their Advocates: http://residencequestionnaire.wordpress.com - http://residencequestionnaire.wordpress.com |
Posted By: eileen
Date Posted: 26 Nov 2013 at 12:26pm
From my limited observations at the CIC-Montreal, it looks like only 3/18 PR card pickups resulted in counter referrals or further checks. So I was probably wrong in regards to the portion of PR card pickups that are random vs. the portion that are non-random. That said, my report of the number observed is an approximation, and obviously I couldn't (& shouldn't!) hear and see everything going on with other people's cases. So, I'll still be very curious about other RQ recipients' experiences with PR renewal! ------------- Resources for Future Canadians & their Advocates: http://residencequestionnaire.wordpress.com - http://residencequestionnaire.wordpress.com |
Posted By: RussCan
Date Posted: 26 Nov 2013 at 12:29pm
|
Eileen, thanks for your detailed yet hilarious recollection of that morning. LOL reading. Also, kudos to you for self-composure. In your place, and with my temper, I would have gone through the roof had I been told to take a long walk on a short peer after making me wait for an hour. Well done. It’s obvious to me that your case is a special one, for whatever reason. I am not sure which corn of theirs you must have stomped, but they clearly don’t like you. |
Posted By: Justice4B
Date Posted: 26 Nov 2013 at 12:47pm
|
eileen: Thanks for the early afternoon laugh!Your story bears resemblance to mine, and yes, its after 'speaking up' a bit, that one gets to the actual result of getting the (darn) PR card. In both my and your examples, the PR cards were 'releasable', but it seems someone was interested in a little lap-dance ( ) before they could part with the PR card, which was your's to begin with!If you see my post earlier, upon the CIC agent asking as to how do they know whether I had been living 'here', my polite retort was something like "because I know I was living here" (and how difficult is that to prove?). I had also offered to go bring my PP(s), first driving back home. All in all, I am happy that you got your PR card, and more so that they did not have to call Security on you/your husband. The mistake frustrated PRs make in situations like this is get rowdy and out of line --and CIC would be happy to have you leave the building. When I went in to the walk-in meeting, I did not know what to expect in-so-far as that letter I was chasing, but having had enough "CIC experience" by that time, my brain was attuned to being firm ( vs. being rude). There is no law against being firm, and using some common sense. After all, this is a PR process with CIC, not your day in Court for a serious criminal offence, where one must go "yes, Your Honor", "no, Your Honor". A good learning experience for anyone who will face "oblivious" reasons for non-issue of PR card, once they are at that dreaded CIC counter! Congrats!  |
Posted By: dpenabill
Date Posted: 26 Nov 2013 at 2:39pm
If only we had more participants providing us with even partial reports like this, we would indeed be able to map a great deal more about how processes actually unfold in practice. Thank you eileen for this. All is well that ends well, albeit obviously what should have been rather perfunctory took essentially near half a work day. One does have to wonder about efficiencies, or more to the point, practices destroying any chance of employing efficient procedures.
I must have misunderstood your reference to randomly selected applicants. My reference was to the percentage of PRs applying for a new (replacement) PR card who are selected to pick-up the card in person as opposed to those who are simply mailed the PR card. That is, I was referring to the process outlined in the OB, not to PRs picking up cards in person who might be randomly selected to be given a counter-referral. I do not know that there is a random selection, from those required to pick-up in person, for further inquiry. My sense is that the criteria I quoted from the OB above (or a more updated version) are applied and counter-referrals (further inquiry) are fact/circumstance based not random. That does not preclude some random selection for quality control purposes but if that is also being done it should be a very small percentage.
It would be very difficult, probably impossible to discern what was really going on behind the counter. There are simply too many variables, among the possibilities we could guess about, let alone some about which we probably have no clue. ------------- 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 |
Posted By: EasyRider
Date Posted: 26 Nov 2013 at 2:47pm
Looks like a lack of authorization to release card from someone who wasn't there at the moment or couldn't make decision in time. On the other hand, letter with invitation had been sent to pick up the card. Reveals how ad hoc their procedures are. ------------- https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0At5U1gEsWR9CdEo1OXNzdDlQR3NGV2Z5YlBQZVJMVXc - Montreal Citizenship Timelines |
Posted By: eileen
Date Posted: 26 Nov 2013 at 3:07pm
I don't know what happened. My guess was that the agent inside (redhead?) had my file up on GCMS and saw the (likely) A5 triggered RQ in my citizenship file and may have contemplated issuing at PR RQ as well. It stands to reason that residence concerns for citizenship might indicate residence concerns for PR. The redheaded CIC officer had a physical file in her hand when she spoke with the counter agent, right before I was called up. I imagined that it was my file and that she had it pulled from the catacombs and was convinced to release the card by looking through my RQ submission. It's just conjecture. A whole lot of ifs. It could have been a particularly voluminous file of office worker lunch orders for all I know. And it relies on the fallacy that good or fast CIC outcomes indicate strong cases (ie she looked at my file and was AWED by my amazing Canadian residentiality) while bad or delayed outcomes indicate a weak case. While there's a grain of truth to this, there's so much randomness and mystery in the system that we just can't assume we understand the whys, the why-nots or the whens. I think I'm going to finally order my ATIP with physical files though. ------------- Resources for Future Canadians & their Advocates: http://residencequestionnaire.wordpress.com - http://residencequestionnaire.wordpress.com |
Posted By: dpenabill
Date Posted: 26 Nov 2013 at 4:09pm
That is my sense of things as well. I do not disagree with the possibilities posed by EasyRider, for example, I just think those are merely some of the possibilities among many others. However, I would not use the term "random" in this context, even though what happens may seem to be random. There are probably cause-and-effect factors at play, even if highly unpredictable (unpredictability does not equal random), and even if the cause-and-effect triggers are not much if at all relevant. I would note, however, overall that I strongly believe qualified applicants (for whatever is applied for) are far more likely to succeed, and the more apparent the applicant is qualified the more likely the applicant will encounter less difficulty in the process. Not perfectly. Not anywhere near perfectly. Lots of exceptions. But for most I believe this is how it goes. Secondly, though, there is also the presentation element. A lot of things factor into this, physical appearance included, language skills including how articulate the individual is, and even more subtle factors like a confident image, and not to forget typical biases which may have only a small influence but all humans have some and these can have an impact. And, even more subtle aspects can have some influence, like the difference between being affluent and poor. Some of this may have less direct import in decisions made without a person-to-person contact, although to some extent many such factors still lurk beneath the surface in decision-making, but can loom more significantly when there is a person-to-person contact. This can be rather unfair. But, from job interviews to dealing with someone at a counter, our presence can have a significant impact on how the person we are dealing with assesses us, and this can be very much apart from our actual qualifications. In this regard, I also concur in suggestions above about the person who is firm but not confrontational or hostile: I have the sense that the person who appears capable of ably contesting a decision, and likely to do so if the decision is adverse, has a distinct advantage. This world tends to be particularly harsh, and unfairly so, for those who do not have good inter-personal skill sets, for those less capable of self-advocacy. My heart sinks when I think of the hardships some people I have known face over and over again because of this or that disadvantage, from physical handicaps to things like language skills. As much as I really do think that CIC pursues (however imperfectly at times) a just and fair result for the vast majority of clients it deals with, I recognize that CIC is part of the world-at-large, and there are indeed many, many unfair aspects of how things work in the world-at-large, including at CIC (and perhaps aggravated more than some at CIC given the great diversity of clients and issues involved). Sorry about the tangent. Some days I am more discouraged than others, and this discussion, alluding to what can have an impact on an individual's case and thus on that individual's life, touches a nerve. I think about an immigrant for whom neither French nor English is a first language, who struggles some with which one he or she has attempted to become fluent, and who has not found the economic opportunities in Canada he or she thought were waiting, and who may be struggling to hold down two not very well paid jobs while also trying to raise children, and for whom the trip to the local CIC office is not at all convenient. A whole morning sidetracked just to pick up a PR card can have a big impact on some people's life. If, in addition, they struggle with the language a little, and are not all that skilled even in their first language, and are beseiged with other stresses in life, what a bleak nightmare it could be, especially if informed they will have to return on yet another day. That noted, many here focus their disappointment and consternation at CIC. And there are aspects of what CIC does which deserve to be criticized or even condemned. But overall I see a huge bureaucracy struggling to deal with big issues, little issues, conflicting agendas, conflicting policies, an imprecise law, a flawed law, and an underfunded organization with an understaffed workforce, and literally tens of thousands of not-so-easy to deal with clients, many of whom are deliberately not-so-easy to deal with, and many, many more essentially the victim of difficult circumstance. That is, a mess. But this is just a slice of all the problems our modern society is dealing with, not very well at the moment it seems. I am personally doing rather well, more so than I think I deserve actually, while I see so many others struggling, and suffering, and the gap between the doing-well and the struggling-and-suffering growing wider and wider. I don't know. I wonder and I worry. Lots of things seem on the brink of not working well at all, at least not very well for a large number of people who undoubtedly deserve better. End of tangent. ------------- 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 |
Posted By: eileen
Date Posted: 26 Nov 2013 at 4:26pm
I know you don't believe that. And if I had more time to explain, I would do so with more nuance. Obviously I agree that people that haven't completed their 1095 are more likely to encounter delays and be denied. But the vast majority of us RQ recipients will be approved for citizenship. Even if it takes 4, 5 years, 10 years. i just don't accept that my 5 years of non-citizenship are rightfully forfeited for my lack of full time employment in an office job. Anyway, yes this is a how things should be vs. how things are. But I just can't accept that my disenfranchisement, and the disenfranchisement of tens of thousands of other is how it should be. Collateral damage is damage none-the-less. And it doesn't feel good to sit for two hours with my husband debating what we do if my PR card is withheld, what if (god forbid) my parents get sick, do we chance it at the border? Do I risk seeing my elderly parents vs. risking not being able to return to my home with my husband and young daughter? It's dehumanizing. What if my PR is threatened with revocation? What does that mean for my husband's rights as a citizen to live with his wife? What about my husband's mobility rights? And yes, this is me, well-educated, white, American, firm but calm. How do these processes affect far more vulnerable or precarious applicants? ------------- Resources for Future Canadians & their Advocates: http://residencequestionnaire.wordpress.com - http://residencequestionnaire.wordpress.com |
Posted By: Justice4B
Date Posted: 26 Nov 2013 at 5:04pm
|
eileen: I think if we are intelligent enough to read, decipher, comprehend, and respond to mile-long posts, we are intelligent enough to put our paperwork in accordance with the guidelines set out by the powers that be! |
Posted By: RussCan
Date Posted: 26 Nov 2013 at 6:23pm
Interesting tangent. Enjoyed reading. It stems right back to the question of equality when applied to human beings. One is articulate and eloquent, another is tongue-tied and linguistically challenged, one is handsome and another charmless, one is affluent and one struggles, one is graceful and charismatic and one is not. So is it fair or is not in the universal sense of fairness. Its neither. It’s the way it is. People are different. Opportunities can be and should be equal but people simply are not.The socialist-communistic system has failed miserably around the world falling prey to the fallacious concept of the universal happiness resting on ubiquitous equality, allegedly, rampant throughout all the layers of society. The concept was expressed as - “from everyone, based on his abilities, to everyone based on their needs”. As you can imagine the needs were almost the same whilst the abilities (read aspirations) varied dramatically. Someone wanted to stay on the couch and watch TV the whole day long, other was willing to bend down backwards to acquire new skills to better his life. Look at the EU. Every country in the union wants same perks in life. But whilst the Greeks and Spaniards want to drink, eat, retire at the age of 50 and have endless siestas, the Germans and British are expected to take the tab. How sustainable such a union is?! When you are saying that you are doing well more than you are deserved, I think you are being overly modest (unless you won a lottery), because the reason you are doing well is likely because you had worked hard to be where you are now to become who you are now. When I was 20, I did not speak a word in English. Being a freshly baked graduate of a petroleum institute in Russia, I quickly realized that I needed English badly if I wanted to succeed professionally and financially. I had to work 2 jobs during the day and grind into the English grammar during the night. I was focused on the long term priorities. So being where I am now (socio-economically) and looking back I can say that I have deserved what I have. And there are a lot of examples like mine around the world. I will likely be accused of being peremptory in my line of reasoning, but would opine to say that likely the collective immigrant you are referring to in your post who straggles to speak either of the languages - straggles for a reason. Each to their own. you can start throwing stones at me. |
Posted By: dpenabill
Date Posted: 27 Nov 2013 at 1:19am
I was not expressing a sentiment, but rather making an observation, an observation which is almost certainly accurate, and which is important contextually when trying to sort out not only why things go wrong, but what applicants can do to reduce the risk of things going awry. (That said, there is a great deal that is not within the applicant's control. And sometimes the best effort we can make is to figure out the difference.) I do not follow what it is you claim to know I do not believe. But I get the impression you have my sentiments all wrong, very wrong. Bottom-line 1: An unfair process is unfair. And yes, as I always note, there are "lots of exceptions" and how it works for most does not excuse, justify, or even condone how unfair it is for the exceptions. To even hint that my sentiments are to the contrary is wrong. Bottom-line 2: there is no laying of blame inherent in trying to accurately differentiate how disproportionately some applicants are treated by CIC compared to how most are treated, and in particular that is not to blame those less-then-most who disproportionately endure delays and inconveniences. (Which is also not to overlook that while the reasons for problems are many, and varied, ranging from the law itself, to all the usual flaws in a bureaucracy, to conflicts in agendas and policies, there are also more than a few on the applicant side of the fence who are a part of the problem. The problems in citizenship processing are not just complicated, but many and diverse, and there is no one-shot solution that is going to fix all the problems.) In any event, an effort to characterize all CIC processing with broad strokes based on how unfair the process is for some, but failing to acknowledge how it works for most, will fail to recognize what the real issues and real problems are, let alone help the powers-that-be to recognize what is wrong and address it. There is a profound difference between identifying real problems and their causes, versus broadside criticisms which lose impact because, frankly, they lack veracity.
The fact that the process can be particularly harsh for some, and especially those who do not have the same advantages as many of the rest of us, was after all a significant part of the point I was making. And you also have a citizen spouse. Many immigrants do not have that in their corner either. I consider and am concerned about how the downsides of this process have a detrimental impact on many, many other applicants. Some participants here, apparently, are only concerned for themselves. No surprise, that seems to be the fashion these days, just not mine.
Sure, I have worked hard for much of my life, and suffered more than a few hardships along the way, but I also have had a great many advantages compared to a lot of people. And in many ways I have had it easy. Along the way I have known many, many people who have worked harder, longer, suffering more, enduring more, and whose circumstances are not all that well off. And I am well aware of the profoundly disadvantaged circumstances in which most people are born into this world, far more difficult beginnings that I had. And I am well aware that all the benefits of a fairly properous life, including mine, can never be self-made but are dependent on the concurrent efforts and investments and labour of many, many others. I did not build the airplanes that fly me to visit family I care about for example, or the tools the doctors used when I needed surgery. Social injustice is nothing new. There are no pop-in-the-microwave solutions for dealing with it. I was mostly expressing concerns, what I worry about, what hurts my heart, what discourages me some days more than others. I do not know how many times a man can turn his head before he sees people cry (to butcher a line from Bob Dylan), but I see people crying and my heart aches for them. Sometimes it helps to focus on the immediate things in our lives, particularly those which we can actually influence. I like this forum and am vested in it a great deal, for example, because to me it levels the playing field some. It helps to offset the lack of communication PRs and PRs applying for citizenship get from CIC. We help one another learn more about how the process works and how to navigate it as best we can. To do that, of course, we have to be honest with ourselves about how it really does work, as best we can figure out, which includes of course identifying the ways in which it does not work. ------------- 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 |
Posted By: RussCan
Date Posted: 27 Nov 2013 at 7:43am
| Well said, depenabill! Thank you. |
Posted By: eileen
Date Posted: 27 Nov 2013 at 9:07am
|
Dpenabill, the purpose of my comment was not to argue, especially since I think we largely agree. I meant to highlight the point that the speed of processing may be entirely irrelevant to the qualifications for citizenship (or PR card renewal). There are too many variables for individuals to draw the conclusion, based on their personal experiences that fast=I'm great and slow=I suck. I believe this is worth mentioning because, with processing times at a record high, a lot of us (yes, including me) are encountering a slow, opaque process and the anxiety that comes along with it. ------------- Resources for Future Canadians & their Advocates: http://residencequestionnaire.wordpress.com - http://residencequestionnaire.wordpress.com |
Posted By: RussCan
Date Posted: 27 Nov 2013 at 10:29am
Eileen,
Forgive me for this conjecture, as it’s only a hunch, but I think there are some skeletons in your closet, you are not mentioning, that turned your application into a personal matter between you and the CIC, as I mentioned earlier, they are clearly ill-disposed and biased towards you. With all the known advantages in your corner (education, Canadian husband, American, Caucasian etc.,) its highly implausible to be a freak incident. Even though it might be. |
Posted By: RQ-Say what?!
Date Posted: 28 Nov 2013 at 6:19am
| ... |
Posted By: eileen
Date Posted: 28 Nov 2013 at 7:25am
|
Russcan, Every individual on this forum can assess the integrity of other posters as they see fit. I will note that I am one of the few who does not use a pseudonym on this forum and has spoken publicly about my case, which raises my accountability for what I say compared to most other posters. My issue with any secret "hunch" the CIC has though is that I believe I should have the right to know what it is. To address an unspoken suspicion is to fight a ghost. This is a frustration shared by many RQ recipients. RQ-SayWhat? Mine had the same message when clicking on the "decision made". I don't recall the messages switching, but they both look pretty familiar. I'm not sure you can read too much into it though. The cic should contact you within 4 weeks. If not, call the Call Centre and they will send an inquiry to the local office. ------------- Resources for Future Canadians & their Advocates: http://residencequestionnaire.wordpress.com - http://residencequestionnaire.wordpress.com |
Posted By: greeny
Date Posted: 28 Nov 2013 at 12:05pm
 wow, youк adventure made my day  sorry if I have already asked you about your timeline with PR, I sent mine Nov 04 and called them a week ago , they said they started to open envelopes came in Septmber, so mine will be opened in mid january , I guess
------------- landed: May, 2003 applied: Dec04,2009 test/RQ: Feb15,2011 st.clair 2nd RQ: Aug 2014 Total waiting time to oath: 60,5 months :)= 5 years and 14 days oath- Dec , 2014 |
Posted By: dpenabill
Date Posted: 28 Nov 2013 at 5:26pm
|
General observations: For most (not all, not by a wide margin), there is usually a correlation between applicants who appear to be fully qualified and how smooth the sailing is. This does not guarantee that all who are qualified and whose application tends to clearly show qualification will enjoy smooth sailing. But there is almost certainly a proportional relationship between the appearance of qualification and routine processing. I mention this often, whenever the discussion might suggest that CIC imposes hurdles randomly, capriciously, or arbitrarily, tending to suggest that all applicants have reason to worry about suffering inordinate hurdles or excessive delays in the processing of their application. I hope to mitigate the anxiety some might otherwise unnecessarily have. For most, the odds of smooth sailing are good if they are qualified and the application appears to show their qualification. But, yes, not everyone who is qualified, and whose application appears to show their qualification, will enjoy smooth sailing. Indeed, while most do, the number who do not appears to be substantial, a rather large minority one might observe. For those who do encounter additional hurdles and delays, there is a huge range of reasons or factors involved. Many of these reasons or factors are ones that the applicant has no control over. Many of these are more about CIC's prescribed criteria for imposing additional scrutiny or procedural steps, including RQ for some citizenship applicants, including in-person pick-up of PR card or even a counter-referral for some PRs renewing their PR card. But there is, probably (almost certainly, with the usual rate of exceptions in individual cases typical for any similar bureaucratic processing, ranging from an officer having a bad day to the occasional influence of bias), some reason. Not all reasons are directly related to qualification (as I just mentioned above, there are prescribed criteria which will trigger elevated scrutiny and additional procedures, which are not necessarily directly relevant to qualification; obvious example: recently issued/renewed drivers' license). Not all reasons are necessarily fair (particularly in so far as their impact on individuals). Not all reasons are publicly known. We know some criteria are very broad. Many here can and do make cogent arguments why this or that reason/criteria is not a good one, is unfair, is inappropriate, or otherwise a reason or factor which should not trigger additional hurdles or delay. And it is clear that CIC's practices and policies tend to impose the same high hurdles for minimal reasons as it does for reasons which are based on real concerns regarding qualification: the applicant who applies with 1327 days of APP and submitted a driver's license issued within three months, which may be (perhaps most likely is) just a coincidence having nothing to do with residency, gets the same RQ as the applicant who has a U.S. green card, whose spouse and children live abroad, apparent inconsistencies or omissions in his travel declarations in the residency calculation, and who applied with 364 days of absence (just 1096 days APP). Both get the very same RQ, and are required to suffer the same intrusion into their privacy, the same inconvenience in compiling and submitting the required information and requested documents, and potentially the same long delays. Sorting out what we know about what potentially leads to additional procedures, elevated hurdles, and longer processing timelines, is made all the more difficult not only because there are reasons/factors which CIC almost certainly applies which we are not informed regarding, but in the individual case there is rarely any explanation for the why. It is not easy to correlate personal circumstances and actual outcomes. And of course this adds all the more to the levels of frustration and anxiety suffered by thousands and thousands of qualified applicants. To my view, a huge, huge part of the problem is the extent to which the optics depend on how the majority are treated, and how disproportionately some applicants are treated compared to the majority. Thus I think it is important to recognize the disparity, recognize that how CIC handles the majority of cases, the smooth sailing the majority enjoy, versus the extent to which an applicant will suffer an intrusion of privacy, the inconvenience of compiling and submitting the RQ response, and a delay that often is more than double the amount of time, just because, for example, the applicant happened to apply for citizenship five years after landing, and so had just renewed his driver's license a month before applying demands some serious attention. A fair and just society will not treat people with such disparity because of a minor detail like this. Unless and until both ends of the spectrum are recognized by those in a position to make a difference, there is little hope of overcoming the optics (which are the focus of this government, and most governments actually) created by how it goes for the majority. Personally my sense is that those who want to make an effective case for reform should recognize and acknowledge that it is the disparity between how the majority of qualified applicants are routinely processed and the burdens and delays imposed on other qualified applicants, that shows there is profound unfairnes and injustice in how thousands of qualified applicants are treated. I do not want to be an advocate personally. I spent a hard portion of my life as a professional advocate, usually for people in rather difficult situations, often in a struggle with a government body, and for compensation that led me to slide deeper and deeper into debt at the time. I think I did my share of that. Now, I prefer to focus here on doing what I can to keep track of how this process works and facilitate the exchange of information and insight regarding the process, and how to best navigate it. That's enough for me I feel. But I also think this effort, to get better informed, should be of use to those who do embrace the activist's agenda and are trying to make a difference on that side of things. But in this regard, frankly, too often I see an alliance of sorts between those who see problems, and want to influence the real decision-makers to address and solve the problems, with a somewhat larger, broader, rather undisciplined crowd who wallow in broadside criticisms of CIC. My sense is that those interested in advocacy diffuse if not undermine their position when they do this. The accusations that CIC is deliberately malvolent (engaging in deliberate schemes to obstruct qualified applicants for example) are farfetched and warrant no more than being dismissed. The assertions that CIC randomly, capriciously or arbitrarily imposes inordinate burdens and excessive delays as a matter of policy relative to applicants generally involves a somewhat more elusive evaluation. As with any bureaucratic process, there are always some instances in which bias, ineptitude, occasional misfeasance (officer having a bad day) or even malfeasance (a disgruntled or discriminatory bureaucrat for example), will have the effect of a individual case being handled capriciously or arbitrarily. Whether this is more a problem in CIC than normal tolerances I am not sure. My sense it is not that big a part of the problem, that there are other more systemic problems having a detrimentally disproportionate impact on qualified applicants. (Although workload relative to resources and funding can itself overwhelm a bureaucracy like CIC and directly lead to ineptitude, negligence, inadvertent error, and just general delay, and this aspect is probably a significant part of the overall pattern of problematic impositions affecting qualified applicants.) If I was more involved with the activist side of things, I would be concerned to more effectively distance myself, my activist efforts, from the arguments that CIC is generally out-of-control, not a properly functioning body, is broadly failing to properly process citizenship applications, or is systemically treating applicants capriciously or arbitrarily. Why? Because that argument falls flat on its face when CIC is successfully, routinely processing 150,000 or more applications a year (on an average). Yes, the increasing inventory deserves and will get some attention. Yes, individual cases evidencing extreme hardship or abuse deserve and will get some attention. But there is a big gulf between the routine processing that most qualified applicants experience, and the particular, finite number of individual cases extreme enough to garner some significant attention. It is the nature and character of what is happening in that in-between group that should be illuminated, brought to the attention of those who might influence how things will be done going forward. It is not a small group. Indeed, there are many thousands and thousands of qualified applicants whose cases are now sitting in a RQ processing queue. How does the activist communicate the nature of the problem? bring attention to how serious it is? illuminate the extent to which there is grave and thus unfair disparity between how people in relatively equal status/circumstance are treated? Let's be frank: getting the message delivered in a way that will effectively educate the public, MPs, government employees or officers, CJs even, as to just how unfair the process is for a rather large minority of qualified applicants is NOT easy. If the tone of this forum is a clue, I think the effort is being butchered and diverted by overly general, misguided criticisms that fail to clearly illuminate just how disparate the treatment is. We see a report in the forum today of an applicant going to the test less than nine months after applying; while we do not know when this applicant will take the oath, it is readily inferred that he or she is not alone, that there are others proceeding through the process in such fashion, many of whom will soon take the oath. The more that becomes the norm, the more unfair it is for other just as qualified applicants to have to wait two, three, or more years to get through the process. In other words: to my view a huge part of how unfair and unjust the system is, has to do with how it is smooth sailing for most and how disproportionately it is not smooth sailing for others. But to make that point in a way that is more likely to open eyes and bring meaningful attention, it is important to get it right about what is really happening, as best a person can. ------------- 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 |
Posted By: papa73
Date Posted: 30 Nov 2013 at 8:44am
|
Mine was processed within 5 weeks and I received my card in the mail. The whole process was rather quick.
------------- Application for Citizenship sent: 10/15/2011 Acknowledment letter: 11/13/2011 In Process: 07/31/2012 Pre-Test RQ Received: 08/06/2012 RQ Mailed back to CIC:09/06/2012 CBSA Report Rec: 10/31/12 |
Posted By: greeny
Date Posted: 30 Nov 2013 at 11:32pm
are you in Toronto? you were lucky it can't be 5 weeks, Cic said they started Sep application on Nov 15 - that's far more than 5 weeks and that's the starting point of processing ------------- landed: May, 2003 applied: Dec04,2009 test/RQ: Feb15,2011 st.clair 2nd RQ: Aug 2014 Total waiting time to oath: 60,5 months :)= 5 years and 14 days oath- Dec , 2014 |
Posted By: papa73
Date Posted: 01 Dec 2013 at 9:21pm
Yes I am in Toronto and St Claire is my center and I received my card back in August. ------------- Application for Citizenship sent: 10/15/2011 Acknowledment letter: 11/13/2011 In Process: 07/31/2012 Pre-Test RQ Received: 08/06/2012 RQ Mailed back to CIC:09/06/2012 CBSA Report Rec: 10/31/12 |
Posted By: life900
Date Posted: 02 Dec 2013 at 1:37am
|
Hi, Would you please share your complete PR application timeline? How long it took from approval to actually receiving the card by mail? Thanks |
Posted By: life900
Date Posted: 02 Dec 2013 at 1:41am
Hi canuck, would you mind sharing the timeline of you PR renewal application? Thank you |
Posted By: greeny
Date Posted: 02 Dec 2013 at 5:31pm
I would like to be that lucky want to go to my vacation in January , but as I was said in November they started September applications, that means mine will be touched in January  ------------- landed: May, 2003 applied: Dec04,2009 test/RQ: Feb15,2011 st.clair 2nd RQ: Aug 2014 Total waiting time to oath: 60,5 months :)= 5 years and 14 days oath- Dec , 2014 |
Posted By: cococool
Date Posted: 02 Dec 2013 at 5:46pm
Hi canuck, Do you still have that job that requires frequent travels abroad? Or did you get a new job? |
Posted By: papa73
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2013 at 6:01pm
My application was received on 06/15/2013 and I received my card on 08/29/2013. I was quite surprised by the speed at which it was processed considering that I am a RQ recipeint. I guess we cannot read too much into it but I am hoping that I will get a test invite soon. ------------- Application for Citizenship sent: 10/15/2011 Acknowledment letter: 11/13/2011 In Process: 07/31/2012 Pre-Test RQ Received: 08/06/2012 RQ Mailed back to CIC:09/06/2012 CBSA Report Rec: 10/31/12 |
Posted By: greeny
Date Posted: 04 Dec 2013 at 12:56am
that' 10 weeks not - 5  ------------- landed: May, 2003 applied: Dec04,2009 test/RQ: Feb15,2011 st.clair 2nd RQ: Aug 2014 Total waiting time to oath: 60,5 months :)= 5 years and 14 days oath- Dec , 2014 |
Posted By: RQ-Say what?!
Date Posted: 09 Dec 2013 at 2:25pm
|
.... |
Posted By: greeny
Date Posted: 14 Dec 2013 at 2:34am
here is my timeline for PR renewal
Permanent Resident Card
The trick is when I'll get it 5 years ago it took about 2 months just to get it after the decision had been made. and since I'm RQer I think I will be asked to pick it up at CIC, 99% sure
------------- landed: May, 2003 applied: Dec04,2009 test/RQ: Feb15,2011 st.clair 2nd RQ: Aug 2014 Total waiting time to oath: 60,5 months :)= 5 years and 14 days oath- Dec , 2014 |
Posted By: greeny
Date Posted: 14 Dec 2013 at 2:40am
if it is not a big secret , what was the date in NOV? ------------- landed: May, 2003 applied: Dec04,2009 test/RQ: Feb15,2011 st.clair 2nd RQ: Aug 2014 Total waiting time to oath: 60,5 months :)= 5 years and 14 days oath- Dec , 2014 |
Posted By: allyp
Date Posted: 14 Dec 2013 at 4:36pm
|
Hi How long before the PR card expiry can you apply for renewal.
|
Posted By: dpenabill
Date Posted: 14 Dec 2013 at 6:11pm
Up to six months prior to the PR card's expiry date. This is not obvious from the CIC website, but is clearly stated in the Guide itself. The general PR card information on the CIC website says you may want to applly for a PR card if have one that has expired or will soon expire. Another page ( http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/information/pr-card/apply-how.asp - linked here ) similarly says "you can get another card if you[r] card has expired or will soon expire . . ." The main page for this information at CIC is the http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/information/pr-card/apply-replace-pr-card.asp - Replace or renew a permanent resident card page, which states:
The guide for applying for the PR card says similarly. But in the guide it also states this:
------------- 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 |
Posted By: RQ-Say what?!
Date Posted: 14 Dec 2013 at 8:04pm
| ... |
Posted By: greeny
Date Posted: 14 Dec 2013 at 8:49pm
5 years ago I decided to renew it about 4 months before Expiry, though they sent me a card a few weeks after the old one had turned to be expired, and it was about 2 months after the ECAS showed - my PR is approved ------------- landed: May, 2003 applied: Dec04,2009 test/RQ: Feb15,2011 st.clair 2nd RQ: Aug 2014 Total waiting time to oath: 60,5 months :)= 5 years and 14 days oath- Dec , 2014 |
Posted By: greeny
Date Posted: 14 Dec 2013 at 8:51pm
thank you, please, let me know once you get it, it's 1 month between mine and yours I'm planning a vocation for the end of January and not sure if to start @urgent@ processing ------------- landed: May, 2003 applied: Dec04,2009 test/RQ: Feb15,2011 st.clair 2nd RQ: Aug 2014 Total waiting time to oath: 60,5 months :)= 5 years and 14 days oath- Dec , 2014 |
Posted By: Gigi
Date Posted: 15 Dec 2013 at 10:14am
|
I renewed my PR card this year. I sent the application in mid-May. Only 2 days before the expiration of my PR card in August, I found in the online service "approved". It said they would send it by mail or they might send a letter to have me pick it up at a CIC office. About 2 weeks later with much anticipation, the card was delivered by post. On the card, the date of the issue is actually one week after the expiration of my old card. I had renewed the PR card a couple of times since I landed in Canada in 1998. This was the first time the card was delivered by mail. I had kept my old card because it was the card with which I applied for the citizenship. At the interview, I just showed my new PR card and I wasn't asked to show my old card. Actually, my old card was supposed to be destroyed as instructed. |
Posted By: greeny
Date Posted: 15 Dec 2013 at 10:24am
thank you , so much I'll call them this week ------------- landed: May, 2003 applied: Dec04,2009 test/RQ: Feb15,2011 st.clair 2nd RQ: Aug 2014 Total waiting time to oath: 60,5 months :)= 5 years and 14 days oath- Dec , 2014 |
Posted By: Gigi
Date Posted: 15 Dec 2013 at 10:40am
|
Just to be precise... My application was received in May 16. They started to process in Jul 8. They approved in August 8. I was thinking of sending the application in April, but, the timeline was quite short then, I said to myself "Why don't I wait till May". In May, I found out the waiting time was increased to 90 days. I had my photos taken and sent the application in a hurry. I should have sent it even 10 days before. I wouldn't have had to stress myself in August for nothing. |
Posted By: greeny
Date Posted: 19 Dec 2013 at 12:50pm
thank you! ------------- landed: May, 2003 applied: Dec04,2009 test/RQ: Feb15,2011 st.clair 2nd RQ: Aug 2014 Total waiting time to oath: 60,5 months :)= 5 years and 14 days oath- Dec , 2014 |
Posted By: greeny
Date Posted: 19 Dec 2013 at 12:54pm
any news? ------------- landed: May, 2003 applied: Dec04,2009 test/RQ: Feb15,2011 st.clair 2nd RQ: Aug 2014 Total waiting time to oath: 60,5 months :)= 5 years and 14 days oath- Dec , 2014 |
Posted By: RQ-Say what?!
Date Posted: 19 Dec 2013 at 10:13pm
| ... |
Posted By: greeny
Date Posted: 19 Dec 2013 at 11:32pm
great! so it took 1.5 months from Nov 6 - approved to Dec 19 -got by mail mine will come at the end of Jan , I think it's better for me to try urgent processing  ------------- landed: May, 2003 applied: Dec04,2009 test/RQ: Feb15,2011 st.clair 2nd RQ: Aug 2014 Total waiting time to oath: 60,5 months :)= 5 years and 14 days oath- Dec , 2014 |
Posted By: broket
Date Posted: 20 Dec 2013 at 3:43am
|
I just want to share my experience regarding pr card renewal. I applied for PR card in the end of July and the status changed to in process in early October. I was then requested an additional document in the middle of October which I promptly provided within a week or so. As of Novemeber 21st, my application was approved but I still have not received it yet. I requested urgent processing sometime in November as I need to travel back to my home country next week, but no news since then. I contacted CIC twice; the first agent I spoke to was "REALLY" rude as she refuses to look into my file initially and just insisted that my application was still being worked on even though I mentioned that it was said to be approved in November according to the online status. I politely asked if there is any way that I could get the card before I leave, but she said because of the backlog, the process is taking longer than they expected and so nothing can be done at this moment. The second agent was somewhat helpful as she suggests that I should send another request for urgent processing, which I actually followed immeidately. Yesterday, I got a generic e-mail from CIC agent saying that my request for urgent processing has already been made and I should just wait till the card arrives. I just can't get my head around how things are done within CIC; how could one applicant get his pr card renewed within a month while another must wait for more than 4 months? At this point, I don't know what to do. I'm only leaving for 10 days and for the most of my stay, the local visa office will be closed for holidays and so, I won't be able to get a travel document in time for my comeback. This really sucks and there should be a general guideline by which CIC agents should follow. |
Posted By: RQ-Say what?!
Date Posted: 22 Dec 2013 at 8:05pm
| ... |
Posted By: greeny
Date Posted: 24 Dec 2013 at 12:14pm
any news? ------------- landed: May, 2003 applied: Dec04,2009 test/RQ: Feb15,2011 st.clair 2nd RQ: Aug 2014 Total waiting time to oath: 60,5 months :)= 5 years and 14 days oath- Dec , 2014 |
Posted By: greeny
Date Posted: 24 Dec 2013 at 12:17pm
oh, ok, then it's at least 1 month and 1 week mine was approved on Dec 09 +1month=Jan 09+1 week = Jan 16 + Xmas time - I don't know how many days, I have my trip booked for Jan 19, if not to apply for urgent processing it will the feeling as if of bunjee jumping unless I get the card ------------- landed: May, 2003 applied: Dec04,2009 test/RQ: Feb15,2011 st.clair 2nd RQ: Aug 2014 Total waiting time to oath: 60,5 months :)= 5 years and 14 days oath- Dec , 2014 |
Posted By: broket
Date Posted: 25 Dec 2013 at 3:13am
Unfortunately, no news. Call center agent is clueless and rude. I'm leaving in couple days and now will have to put off return date, taking extra days off at work so I can give myself enought time to get the travel document. To me, this is a complete waste time & money & energy. I applied for PR card in summer and requested for urgent processing well before my departure, but hey... it doesn't really matter to CIC. They do it when they want it done. Who's going to compensate the loss of my income by taking extra time off in January? |
Posted By: greeny
Date Posted: 26 Dec 2013 at 2:44am
 they really screwed up your holidays ! as for urgent processing , they will not accept an inquiry for it if it is less then 3 weeks before departure  ------------- landed: May, 2003 applied: Dec04,2009 test/RQ: Feb15,2011 st.clair 2nd RQ: Aug 2014 Total waiting time to oath: 60,5 months :)= 5 years and 14 days oath- Dec , 2014 |
Posted By: dboo
Date Posted: 06 Jan 2014 at 8:40am
| In applying for a renewal, did you have to make a copy of all the pages of your passport including the expired ones? |
Posted By: greeny
Date Posted: 06 Jan 2014 at 12:23pm
yes ------------- landed: May, 2003 applied: Dec04,2009 test/RQ: Feb15,2011 st.clair 2nd RQ: Aug 2014 Total waiting time to oath: 60,5 months :)= 5 years and 14 days oath- Dec , 2014 |
Posted By: greeny
Date Posted: 06 Jan 2014 at 12:29pm
any news? I called CIC and they asked about the date of departure, it was in 4 weeks, said to call them in 3 weeks, called them in 3 weeks, they said they are unable to perform urgent processing as it is to close to departure date eeer...for you case , if you ere approved on Nov 21 = 40days+5 holiday days = Jan 06 so you must have received your card or will get it in 5 days - my thought ------------- landed: May, 2003 applied: Dec04,2009 test/RQ: Feb15,2011 st.clair 2nd RQ: Aug 2014 Total waiting time to oath: 60,5 months :)= 5 years and 14 days oath- Dec , 2014 |
Posted By: broket
Date Posted: 08 Jan 2014 at 12:02pm
I already left Canada and am currently staying in my home country. This is another issue that made me so mad at how incompetent CIC is. My renewed PR card wasn't processed in time for my departure, so I applied for Travel Document as soon as I got here. Today, I was contacted by Visa processing Center in my country saying that it usually takes more than a month (in some cases, two months) to process travel document so I have to either postpone my return or just go to Canada and explain my situation at the immigration counter, which may or may not work. So to put it another way, it's either losing my job or taking my chances on re-entry. I am SO FURIOUS!!!! |
Posted By: dpenabill
Date Posted: 08 Jan 2014 at 1:45pm
First, a Canadian PR who can establish his or her identity at a Canadian POE will be, and must be allowed entry (without being detained except for some extreme exceptions, such as persons who are a clear security threat). Thus, if you have a currently valid passport, and your expired PR card, and there is no issue regarding who you are, you will be allowed to enter Canada if and when you reach a Canadian Port-of-Entry. Worst case scenario is questioning regarding compliance with the PR residency obligation and if the examining officer determines that there has been a breach of the residency obligation, a 44(1) report which is usually then promptly reviewed by a senior officer (technically the Minister's delegate) who may issue a Removal Order, and then you are allowed to enter Canada (and you have thirty days in which to file an appeal; in the meantime the Removal Order is not enforceable . . . it becomes enforceable after thirty days if you do not file an appeal, or if you appeal and lose, when you lose the appeal). That is the worst case scenario. You get to enter Canada but will have to appeal a Removal Order and in that process show you have complied with the PR residency obligation. If there is no doubt about your compliance with the PR residency obligation, there should be no significant problem at the POE (beyond the usual other stuff, customs issues, questions to confirm identity, things which any Canadian, citizen or PR, can encounter upon returning to Canada). Actually, frankly, for any PR with a potential issue regarding residency obligation compliance, even though having a valid PR card in possession ordinarily reduces the risk of being referred to secondary from the PIL (primary inspection line), for immigration (apart from customs issues), if there are questions about the PR's compliance with residency, it matters little whether or not their PR card is currently valid. That is, a PR with potential residency issues (hence admissibility issues), is taking his or her chances at the POE even if the PR has a currently valid PR card . . . the currently valid PR card does not preclude being issued a Removal Order for inadmissibility. The biggest problem with being a PR abroad without a currently valid PR card is for people carrying a passport from a country which does not have visa-exempt status; for PRs without visa-exempt status and without a currently valid PR card, or PR travel document, it can be difficult if not impossible to travel to a Canadian destination, to even reach a Canadian POE. Commercial carriers (like airlines) must screen all international travelers destined for Canada and assure they have a currently valid travel document authorizing travel to Canada. In other words, if not visa-exempt, the PR without a currently valid PR card will not be allowed to board a flight headed for Canada. Bottom-line: PRs who reach a Canadian POE are not really taking any chance they will be denied entry because they do not have a currently valid PR card in possession so long as they can establish their identity. ------------- 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 |
Posted By: greeny
Date Posted: 08 Jan 2014 at 2:07pm
now it's better to get a travel document in your country, because they will not you let to check-in on board on your way back home with expired PR------------- landed: May, 2003 applied: Dec04,2009 test/RQ: Feb15,2011 st.clair 2nd RQ: Aug 2014 Total waiting time to oath: 60,5 months :)= 5 years and 14 days oath- Dec , 2014 |
Posted By: eileen
Date Posted: 08 Jan 2014 at 2:12pm
------------- Resources for Future Canadians & their Advocates: http://residencequestionnaire.wordpress.com - http://residencequestionnaire.wordpress.com |
Posted By: canuck25
Date Posted: 08 Jan 2014 at 3:23pm
It seems your only option is to wait, unless you have a US visa and can fly to the states and cross by land at a border checkpoint, where you can explain your situation. To my knowledge, most airlines won't let you even board a flight without a travel document that allows you entry into Canada, so flying here without one and hoping to explain things to CBSA at the airport is likely out of the question for you.
|
Posted By: imanh
Date Posted: 08 Jan 2014 at 8:23pm
| I'm pretty sure getting or renewing a US visa in time is much easier than getting the stupid travel document ... I'd also suggest flying to US first and then cross the land border. |
Posted By: smithaliana
Date Posted: 15 Jan 2014 at 11:42pm
|
Yes, it’s very frustrating when processing of a renewed PR card does happen on time. It shows how inefficient cic is in its working. Hope everything works for you and you do not end up losing your job. Good Luck! |
Posted By: greeny
Date Posted: 17 Jan 2014 at 1:06am
|
just letting know
I've got my renewed PR total processing time is 70days including x-mas and weather disaster with blowout in january ( but I sent a bunch of docs a long with application incl/ OHIP records for 5 years , cbsa report for 5 years/ after - "approved' status changed into "complete" in 38 days, after ecas showed "complete" got Pr the next day ------------- landed: May, 2003 applied: Dec04,2009 test/RQ: Feb15,2011 st.clair 2nd RQ: Aug 2014 Total waiting time to oath: 60,5 months :)= 5 years and 14 days oath- Dec , 2014 |