Print Page | Close Window

INTERVIEW: Test-Event - ID/Documents Verification

Printed From: Canada Immigration and Visa Discussion Forum
Category: Canada Immigration Topics
Forum Name: Canadian Citizenship
Forum Description: Commentaries outlining important issues in acquiring Canadian citizenship through naturalization
URL: https://secure.immigration.ca/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=15327
Printed Date: 28 Mar 2024 at 9:28pm


Topic: INTERVIEW: Test-Event - ID/Documents Verification
Posted By: dpenabill
Subject: INTERVIEW: Test-Event - ID/Documents Verification
Date Posted: 14 Mar 2014 at 3:05pm

Identity/Documents Verification Interview at Test-Event

I have been meaning to start a sticky topic for posting reports about the test-event interview experience. Every adult applicant for a grant of citizenship will have to attend such an interview. For those who will be taking the knowledge of Canada test, the interview takes place in conjunction with that event. For those of us who are exempt from taking the knowledge of Canada test, the interview usually (perhaps always) takes place attendant a scheduled test-event.

This topic is thus specifically here for participants to share their interview experience, including observations, and for commentary about the interview process itself. I am making it a sticky topic because it is a common experience for all adult applicants, so these reports should be of interest to almost everyone who visits this particular forum regarding applications for a grant of citizenship (PRs seeking naturalized citizenship).

I am going to make a number of posts in which I will paste posts previously made in the forum by others, in various topics. This will be far from exhaustive but should offer a good sampling of what has previously been posted about the interview experience. For many I will also link to the page where the original post was, but I do not have the links for every post (I began preparing to create this topic awhile ago, but was sporadic in compiling the information from other posts; sorry). I undoubtedly leave out some very good reports. Please feel free to link or copy here other reports about the interview experience, particularly those I have overlooked.

This is part of an effort by me to do some of the things I had intended to do here, much of which I do not expect to accomplish now that my own journey has abruptly reached its conclusion much sooner than I had been anticipating. I have long been spending way, way too much time at this site. And it will be, or perhaps already is, time for me to be moving on to other projects, other venues. So I will try to get at least a bit done, like getting this topic started.

I also apologize for some redundancy in the following posts, and some of this is fragmented. As I indicated, I had been planning to establish a topic in which more organized information about the interview itself could be shared, and I had hoped to approach this more deliberately, more organized, than I now have time to do. (Also note, in this regard, the forum has been under an escalated attack from spam the last two weeks as well, which has disrupted this effort and also consumed more time than I will have going forward.)




-------------
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



Replies:
Posted By: dpenabill
Date Posted: 14 Mar 2014 at 3:07pm

Some typical posts reporting about the interview

Originally posted by ab007 ab007 wrote:

https://secure.immigration.ca/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=95&PN=23&title=timeline-montreal-office - Posted: 04 Feb 2010
My exam went well and all the questions were from the study book "A Look of Canada".

After the exam there was a small interview....the officer asked questions related to [my] application and were verifying the information is correct which i had provided in the [application] form...

after the interview the officer told me that if the judges is satisfy and you pass the test you will receive a letter for oath ceremony [within] 3 to 4 months....that was it...it was pretty smooth process...



Originally posted by mendie mendie wrote:

https://secure.immigration.ca/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=95&PN=34&title=timeline-montreal-office - Posted: 19 Feb 2010
The test was very easy..But the interview took forever..The officers were taking a looong time with each person..Asking about every detail of the past years and checking the passport in details..She even was asking me about trips before I landed.
At the end the lady told me the standard language that if everything is fine, i will get my oath in 3 to 4 months.
I really hope not to get an RQ ..This process is taking forever!



Originally posted by dadadada72 dadadada72 wrote:

https://secure.immigration.ca/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=19&PN=43&title=rq-discussions - Posted: 20 Feb 2010
My wife and I took the test last thursday at 8h30. The writting test was ok . the interwiew was a nightmare. the officer (lady) called me first and and asked me tons of question about my belgian citizenship, my job in montreal , my profession as doctor and so on ,she checked my 2 belgian passports and end up by saying that I must wait my spouse in the waiting room., then called my wife.
The same lady asked to my wife the same questions she asked me before in order to check if we were living together or traveling together and so on ...............,at end she gave the RQ to my wife and said that: << your husband is ok but you you do not have 1095 days based on your passport entries stamps so just file up this RQ and add some proofs of your schoolarship and your present proof of work as a nurse just that, maybe your case will be 2 or 3 months delayed , send them as soon as possible by mail and everything will be ok >> that was all she said.
My wife was devastated and I was really angry.
The officer said nothing about the judge, nothing about the oath, no conclusion speech to me except to my wife.
So I dont know what to think????????????
Can I receive citizenship before my wife or should we be delayed together ? will I receive RQ by mail ? we are really confuse.....help please helpppppppppppp



Originally posted by sendi-mississauga sendi-mississauga wrote:

https://secure.immigration.ca/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=475&PN=50&title=discover-canada-post-sample-qs-here - Posted: 11 Oct 2010
My interview was only 5-10 minutes.

She checked all my papers. She was [surprised] that I only had 2 stamps. (I left Canada only twice)
She asked me how many times I went to the U.S. I said never. She was: You've been here so long and you never went? How come? I said because with my country's passport you can't just go to the States, you need a visa and I did not go, that's all. She checked that form that you have to fill out about your jobs for the past 5 years but she did not have any questions about that. I was done in a few minutes. I was one of the first ones, then we waited more than 2! hours for the rest of the group. Just before the test the male officer told us that quite a few people received RQs, where there is a suspicion that they do not live here. He also said that we can expect oath in 1-3 months from now. BTW Mississauga CIC is MOVING TO A NEW LOCATION AS OF NOVEMBER 1st to Erin Mills Pkwy and Dundas st. Most likely we all will have our oaths there.
Oh, and when I was exiting there was another group already waiting for test! They are working overtime now, to get rid of the backlog. They never had tests scheduled after 4 pm, because that's when they usually close everyday. I think things are really going to speed up now in Mississauga!





-------------
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: 14 Mar 2014 at 3:09pm

Samples of more thorough reports:

Originally posted by EasyRider EasyRider wrote:

https://secure.immigration.ca/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=95&PID=212412&title=timeline-montreal-office#212412 - Posted: 27 Nov 2013
Ok, did my test/interview at 1025 Rue Saint-Jacques today. Took little more than 1 hour for the whole process. At the entrance you show invitation paper and attendant let you in. Everybody were gathering in a waiting room with the seats until it was the time printed on invitation. There were 70-80 people in total. Then agent came and folks over 55 were invited to a "ceremony room" to do interviews with the agents, they were called by their names. Everybody else proceeded to a test room.

Test was very easy-- I didn't have any dates at all and one question with the names I had was something about Sir John A. Macdonald, what can be simpler? The level of difficulty of question is on the same level as on training websites, i.e. nothing tricky and sophisticated. The study booklet can obviously be used to produce much more difficult questions that are in the current versions of a test.

When you complete the test, you put booklet with questions with answer sheet in a basket and proceed directly to the "ceremony room". By the time people were starting to finish their tests, agents in the "ceremony room" were finishing interviewing people over 55. There was no delay, i.e. we didn't have to wait for everybody to complete their tests to queue up for an interview.

Somebody was bringing up applicants' cases in folders with checked answer sheets to the "ceremony room" and putting them into baskets of interviewing agents. There were total of 4 agents in this room doing interviews, plus another one who was interviewing in another room, because there were not enough tables in front for 5 people in that room. Agents were taking cases from baskets and calling up the applicants. Organizers tried to sit applicants as far as possible from the interviewers, so it'd be not so easy to hear the interview dialogs.

I'm under impression that interviewing people had nothing to do with your case directly before an interview, i.e. they were not specifically designated to do your interview. One interviewer just took several cases from another one when he ran out of cases from his own basket.

I wouldn't say all interviews were especially short, at least not for everyone, some people were questioned for 10, maybe even 15 minutes. One interviewer was asking someone about different periods of time in Canada and was pretty thorough.

My interview was rather short and lasted for about 5 minutes. Agent asked for ID's (PR, health card and drivers license), copies of bio-pages of current passport and passport related to a 4-year period, also asked to show a COPR original and provide copy of a COPR. Agent had a checklist form with lots of items on that list, maybe about 15-20, each of them had a checkbox and a comment field related to a specific question. So, when doing interview an agent would tick a checkbox and/or write something in a comment field. Basically, agent is filling "Part B - Inverview" part of a File Requirements Checklist (see here) while conducting interview and resolving additional questions, if any.

The interviewer went through the passport stamps and compared them with a residence calculator printout while ticking the in and out dates that were matching stamps in passport. I had all the stamps matching trips, so there was no problem. Also, the agent refused to use my reference table with trips/stamps I had prepared for interview.

Other questions that were asked:

1. How long have you been living in Canada?
2. When was the last time you traveled out of Canada and for how long? Checked the stamps in a new passport.

3. When you got your PR? (I've got PR after living in Canada for several years).
4. What do you do and where do you work?
5. What company is doing and where it's located?
6. How long have you been working there? (a comment like "same employer" was made in a checklist and some box ticked).

7. Then I was asked about unemployment period (I also noticed that there were big questions and some handwriting in my original application form in a red ink, seemed like around a section related to employment, but I'm not sure 100%). I explained that I moved from one province to another without having a job and then found a job there.
8. What's your current address?
9. Do you rent or do you own?

10. Have you ever had problems with the police anywhere?
11. Have you marital and family status changed since application?
12. Was your new passport issued in Canada?

That's it, as far as I can remember. I didn't get and RQ or anything and was informed that if judge approves the case, oath will be in around 2-4 months after test date. While on my way out I noticed another group of people gathering in a waiting room, so probably they do tests for 2-3 groups a day.

* * *

One other thing I noticed I'd mention that may be related to interview or maybe not. Somebody was checking my LinkedIn account as anonymous user 2 hours before test and between 2-3 weeks ago, right around time when I received test notification or notification could be issued. I thought that was unusual-- 1st, I don't remember anonymous users checking my profile before, second, timing seems suspicious to me. So, maybe it's CIC "googling". Here's how it looked when I got back from the test:

LinkedIn member
This member chose to be shown as anonymous
2 hours ago

LinkedIn member
This member chose to be shown as anonymous
2 weeks ago

I didn't know that somebody could peek on your profile in LinkedIn while remaining completely anonymous (and that's actually feature of this service, as it turns out) and I don't like it. I found there's lots of discontent about this feature among users of this site-- it was supposed to be a professional network site based on openness, instead they allow groups who want to remain secretive peek on you without going for any lengths whatsoever. Seems there's no way to disable this feature for own profile either. I'm disappointed in this service.



Originally posted by eileen eileen wrote:

I had my https://secure.immigration.ca/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=95&PN=624&title=timeline-montreal-office - test and interview this morning and wanted to make a quick report.

I got 20/20 on the test. No problem there.

As I was called up for the interview, I first corrected the pronunciation of my name (I get called Ellen or Hélène in french, which is not my name) and then I asked the officer what her name was. She physically startled at the question and stared at me wordlessly for 2 seconds, before giving me a first name and then staring at me a little longer.

The interview went fine after that though. We talked about the neighbourhood I live in and she asked me to give a quick narrative of what I've been doing in Canada since my qualifying period started in 2007. She had looked over my RQ submission and made notes. She said that it was very thorough and well put together. This is interesting because I do not have some primary documents (no rent receipts, though I have leases and bank statements, and I do not have 4 years of pay stubs because I have periods of unemployment and am currently self-employed).

She was concerned that I had filed taxes in the USA even though I said I was a resident of Canada. I had to tell her that US citizens have to file taxes until the day they die, no matter where they live. She was surprised about that, but seemed to accept it.

She said that due to my travel I am "borderline". She used that word, but then she said that things look good. I pressed her as to whether the CIC would be recommending me for approval or a hearing. She maintained that it was up to the judge and the CIC just gathers the information. But she said that my RQ was strong and vaguely indicated that I would probably maybe go to Oath soon with no hearing but who knows?

So who knows.

When I got home I looked up her first name on GEDS. It seems like she gave me a fake. Which is pretty rich amidst all this rhetoric about integrity and coming from a person who could have learned the name of my dentist from 2007 at a glance, as well as the name of the doctor who delivered my daughter, and who could have rattled off my credit card numbers.

Integrity is for the little guys.




https://secure.immigration.ca/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=14896&PN=2&title=test-experience-st-clair-pretest-rq - link to posts by Spellbound and bangloboy:

Originally posted by Spellbound Spellbound wrote:

I did the test at St. Clair today. The room was really packed. The test itself was super-easy. The interview: the lady who interviewed me had my RQ in front of her. She only checked whether my T4 forms matched the jobs I listed in the application. All travels were checked right from the passport. She said she had no concerns regarding my file, and would recommend the judge to approve it. But - it is CIC, we can always expect the unexpected from them!


Originally posted by bangloboy bangloboy wrote:

Quote I also did the test in St Clair on Jan 30! My agent was cordial. Test was easy - 20/20. Room was packed - i'd say more than 120 people. I chatted with the agent about work etc - she just ticked off from my RQ and what was on my passport. Didn't really look at T4 that much but asked what I've been doing for the past few years. Also said she was satisfied and moving to judge. The good thing she mentioned was things were moving fast and we might be hearing back sooner than the timeframe! :) In fact a friend of mine who applied in April 2013, she didn't get RQed but she had her test last saturday and had her oath on thursday! So they might be pushing things fast

Quote I was RQed and she had all the copies there. I took all my original Notice of Assessments - I saw her flip through the copies I had sent months ago. She never even bothered to ask for supporting docs from me. She only looked at my passport and that's all. We spoke about work verbally but no requests for any originals. Regardless I would take all originals that you submitted as it's better to be safe than never!



Originally posted by bangloboy bangloboy wrote:

She looked through my passport and ticked off what I had mentioned in the RQ. As she was doing this we had conversations, she asked me what I do - and I explained. I also offered if she needed any documents and she said she was fine. After she verified my exits and entries she went on to ask what work I've been doing over the past 4 years. I told her where I worked and why I changed to my current job etc. One thing interesting I noticed was I had taken vacations to the caribbean a few times and countries like Cuba do not stamp anything so I brought my invoices - she said she understood that and didn't need verification! What she ticked off were places like home country I went to twice and other countries I went to for school related stuff. I will update you all once I hear further good news. All the best





Originally posted by exempligrata exempligrata wrote:

The test was easier than I expected and some of the possible answers to many questions were so obviously and hilariously wrong that even if one hadn't read the book, they'd be sure to get some of the questions right.

The officer administering the test gave us several warnings one of which has not been mentioned, or rather, one that I haven't come across on this or any other forum: He warned us that if we left before getting the results of the test that we wouldn't get it by calling the Call Centre.

Overall, the experience was a lot less harrowing than I expected; especially the interview for which I was over-prepared bringing "irrelevant" documents such as my NOA's, and OHIP and CBSA records which were never asked for. I was surprised that the officer neither asked many questions nor engaged in the customary "chit-chat" that many forum members have experienced as a means to verify ones language proficiency; I am glad, however, for that as I was worried that I would be asked about a recent trip I made out of Canada post-application. Perhaps the lack of questions was the indirect result of using Post-it flags to point to all entries and "exits"* in my passport, and Post-it notes to briefly explain certain exit dates. At the very least, using Post-its helped to speed up the process.

The officer informed us that we should receive our Oath invitations in 1-3 months if everything checks out with the CJ... I can see the end in sight!







-------------
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: 14 Mar 2014 at 3:12pm

More sample posts


Originally posted by canadiancoops canadiancoops wrote:

Posted: 21 Feb 2014 at 3:51pm
Today I took my citizenship exam and got 20/20 in Calgary, AB. The questions are much easier than the online tests as the answers are more clear and not too many where the answers almost read the same.

I received a letter last month telling me to bring the letter and and original ID I photocopied in my application along with passport, immigration landing documents.

My time was 8am in the city so awoke at 5:30am and got there at 7:40am. There was already approx. 25 people there before me and they actually started taking people about 7:50am.

They had 3 desks with an immigration officer behind each one and we all stood in line and went forward when called.

We were called (joint app with my wife) and she was very pleasant. Took our passports and drivers license. My wife's had expired since the application so she took a photocopy of the new license.

She chatted with us whether we had a criminal record and then signed the form that came with the letter advising us of our exam date.

She ticked off the dates on the residency calculator in the original application and then did my wife's (some stamps missing so she didn't tick all the dates but didn't question it either)

She asked what we both did for jobs and that was the only question she asked. She talked about the weather, the drive in etc but no questions. Once she had checked the above she gave us the exam multiple choice 1 sheet answer sheet and asked us to move to the exam room. All done. 5 minutes and very nice person.

Other people who's English were not so good (we are from England) sounded like they had more questions to check their English capability I believe.

One couple didn't bring their landing documents and she told them they had to get confirmation before getting oath. Another was foreign (from Iraq) and she didn't have translations of her stamps and they allowed her to do test but said she would need that to be translated before getting oath.

We sat in the room, after the interview, at least 2 seats apart and when the other people behind us had been checked and came in the room one of the women from behind the desk came in and read us our rights - basically saying no cheating allowed, do no discuss exam questions with anybody afterwards etc.

She then handed out our exam questions and said we had 30 minutes to complete. When complete we had to hand in answers and questions at the front and she marked them, gave the answer sheet to an assistant who then took us to a private room and showed us our score, said if everything is all ok with the paperwork then the oath will be late March/early April.

The exam began at 8:50 so it only took them 1 hour to get through approx. 35 people and I was done in 5 minutes on the exam questions and out by 9am. Super quick and easy.

Any questions (except what the questions where) please let me know.

Oh and I had to pay $24 for 3 hours parking at the citizenship offices....ouch lol

Edited by canadiancoops - 21 Feb 2014 at 4:08pm
Calgary:
Rec'd:        June 4/2012 (e-cas updated June 7/2012)
In Process: Jan 16/2013 (e-cas updated Jan 18/2013)
Test Date: Feb 21/2014 (e-cas updated Jan 16/2014, letter issued Jan 13/2014)



Originally posted by pierrerion pierrerion wrote:

https://secure.immigration.ca/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=95&PN=572&title=timeline-montreal-office - Posted: 18 Oct 2013
I just finished my test and interview. Nothing unusual. Here are the details.

I arrived at the CIC office 30 minutes early and there were already quite a few people waiting. Exam started in another room at 12:50pm, with one female agent explaining the procedure for the exam and interview. All instructions were bilingual, with French first then English. Answer sheets and exam booklets were distributed. All the booklets were bilingual, with alternatving French and English pages, French in white and English in blue. It seemed they reused the booklets as mine was quite worn out.

The agent asked us not to leak out the exam questions, not even to family members. But it was easy in my opinion. I got all questions right as i was told by an agent during my interview.

I think there were 3 agents doing the interviews today and around 50 to 60 applicants waiting. So if you finish your exam later than others, you are in for a long wait. My interview was short and brief and the agent friendly. Checked my health card, driver's license, passports and confirmation of permanent residency. Asked me about my history in Canada, educational history, how many times I had been back to my home country, where I worked, where I lived, rent or own, where my parents were, brothers and sisters etc. When talking about what I did for living, he actually asked how I went to work and what bus I took, which was interesting. I offered to show him my tax files and he said it wasn't necessary.

In the end, he said my files would be sent to a judge to decide and if everything was fine I should expect an oath invitation in 2-4 months. So I guess this is really not an indication for trouble. All in all, things went well and I found no indication to be overly concerned. But if an RQ comes, I'll be at peace with it, after all I've learned over the years not to expect too much from governments.




-------------
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: 14 Mar 2014 at 3:20pm

Some observations in reference to interview for a pre-test RQ'd applicant:

Among the notable differences in some interviews, one observes the interviewer checking T4s and comparing them to reported employment history, while the other says the interviewer "Didn't look at T4 that much" but asked general questions about what the applicant had been doing and "chatted" about work. While these may seem minor differences, the point is this illustrates that for each applicant, individually, based on that applicant's situation and history, what CIC focuses on will vary and in many respects be dependent on (relative to) the individual himself or herself.

I would further note, though, that just like at a POE, there are probably questions-for-the-day (or week or month), all staff instructed on a particular topic of query and a stock of questions to pose relative to that query, CIC (again like CBSA at a POE) being given, in effect, marching orders for the day (week, month, whatever period) to focus on certain issues and facts. These could easily, and probably are, geared to groups of applicants . . . it being quite apparent that at least some test events involve groups of applicants with somewhat similar situations.

Main thing, though, is that the actual exchanges in the interview will vary, and could vary substantially.

Another key indication: The employment history can be a big factor. bangloboy had clearly submitted both the CRA Notices of Assessment and T4s in response to the RQ. While this will not always make the difference, make the case successful, the failure to do this is almost certainly a red flag if not an outright invitation to elevated scrutiny and a longer process.

Second only to submitting copies of all relevant and potentially relevant Travel Documents, the submission of these key documents (CRA Notices of Assessment plus source of income tax documents) is probably the next most important documents to submit in responding to RQ.


Other notes/observations:

There is a report (don't have the quote) by chipmunk_montreal regarding an inquiry, in the interview, as to how long in the U.S., job, and so on, including since applying; this report warrants taking note of in particular. Most reports tend to indicate the focus is predominantly on applicants' activity and location during the relevant four years, but reports like this illuminate that CIC is taking note of and looking at some aspects of post-application activity and location. My best guess is that this is elevated for those given RQ, and not so much so for routine cases unless there is a particularly salient red flag waving during the interview.

It is also worth noting that the observations by bangloboy about the interviewer's lack of interest in seeing invoices reflecting travel comports with some observations by pretestRQ based on overhearing interviews with other applicants. The point about the interviewer's lack of interest in seeing what an applicant has (with him or her) to verify information (usually about dates and destinations of travel) warrants more elaboration, but for now it suffices to emphasize that beyond the verifications done in the documents check (primarily focused on identity and the presentation of all Travel Documents) the interview appears to be very much verification of identity and documents oriented, and beyond that is more or less about looking for incongruities, inconsistencies, outright discrepancies, red flags (such as indications the applicant is or has been evasive or deceptive, or has otherwise failed to disclose material information), and NOT much interested in what the applicant has to verify information the applicant already has provided. (Note distinction between verification of identity and required documents, versus assessment or verification of applicant information generally - again, relative to this, my strong sense is that it is limited to looking for red flags, not for corroborating or verifying information otherwise -- except, of course, checking travel documents to be sure stamps and such are consistent with reported travel/absences.)

Thus, it appears that the point of bringing any additional documents (beyond those requested) is not so much about the applicant affirmatively presenting a supporting case, but more about having the documents available if they are specifically relevant to an inquiry made by the interviewer, that is, if they provide a direct response to a question by the interviewer, and the interviewer is interested, then, in considering the document. This means that usually the additional documents will be no more than excess baggage, but if and when there is a chance they could be presented, it may indeed be worth having them. As I have oft said, I would stick to the more essential, key documents for this, and not be surprised if there is no opportunity at all to present them.

Reminder: what the interviewer asks, and what the interviewer is interested in seeing, is likely to vary considerably from case to case, individual to individual.

The latter is further illustrated by yet another good report of the interview by incanada. This report also warrants more extensive commentary, but for now a couple things warrant emphasis: reference to the checklist and the inquiry regarding visas (U.S. and UK). The report illuminates aspects of the process in this regard which should help others anticipate the scope of potential questions, beyond the perfunctory ones.

Another eavesdropping observation of much interest is in the report by incanada, having to do with the contrast between questions posed to an applicant who, apparently, did not provide some key documentation in response to the RQ, like CRA Notices of Assessment, and other questions directly related to the RQ, versus minimal questions directly related to the RQ response in the interview for incanada's RQ'd partner.

Back to the observations by pretestRQ, highlights include the observations about the applicant who failed to present an expired passport. Huge, huge mistake. Anyone who needs to renew or replace an older passport and is not absolutely certain the older passport will be returned, should do their best to make a complete copy and have that copy verified as complete as of a particular date. While obviously a certified copy would be best, that may be impractical or even impossible to obtain.

I made a complete, dated copy of every page of my old passport before sending it off to be replaced by a new passport. I did not go the extra step of having the copy independently verified. (I was in a rush, we had some vacation plans abroad coming up, and my home country does return the old passport.)

For those who can anticipate the likelihood their old passport will not be returned to them, more precautions are probably a good idea, some independent, dated verification that the copy is a true, correct, and complete copy as of the particular date. The equivalent of a notary, for example, should be able to compare the original and the copy and at least verify that the copy is a complete and accurate copy of the original as of that date. While obviously the impact of failing to have the older passport will vary depending on all the circumstances, including in particular the extent to which the applicant can submit reliable, objective documentation showing actual presence in Canada, failure to present an old passport can be a huge problem and is one of the issues that arises in numerous Federal Court cases as a key factor underlying a denial of approval for citizenship. In this regard, there is mention in the Federal Court decisions that a copy of the passport should make a big difference.

Another observation worth highlighting is an interviewer's comment about what to submit in response to a request for additional information and documents:
Quote Officer said provide information only for the relevant four years. He said they don’t need boxes of documents but they definitely need key documents which will help in decision.
I have often tried to make the point that key documents are crucial, and that boxes of other stuff are virtually irrelevant. If the key documents do not suffice to make one's case, boxes of documents are not likely to suffice either, but the details in those boxes are fertile sources of incongruities or inconsistencies, and thus may be as likely to hurt more than they help (subject to the omnipresent it-depends factor).




-------------
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: 14 Mar 2014 at 3:49pm


FRQ: Pre-interview Check and Interview

For reference:

Quote => PART B (to be completed by local office)

REQUIRED: PRE INTERVIEW VERIFICATION
- All follow-ups completed on applicable CPC Sydney triage criteria
- Checked GCMS/FOSS before interview
- Applicant is prohibited
- Residence questionnaire on file
- Applicant has used a suspect residential address after application submission
- Discrepancy in absences between citizenship application and responses to questions on the RQ and/or CIC records
- Discrepancy in addresses listed on citizenship application and those on the RQ and/or CIC records
- Self-identified as a consultant, self-employed or unemployed with any travel during the relevant 4 year period


INTERVIEW
- Identification: Original of 2 IDs submitted with application have been verified (including 1 photo ID)
- Immigration documents originals verified (IMM 1000/5292/5509/5686 and PR Card)
- Signature verified
- Biopage/Renewal page of passport/Travel document provided
- Passports/Travel documents relevant to entire 4 year period
- Passport/Travel documents verified against absences declared on application or RQ (if applicable)
- Work/Education discussed
- Prohibitions declared at interview
- Residence Questionnaire given at interview with CIC official
- Language (choose one): Satisfactory, Waived, Hearing
- Special Remarks/Explanations/Concerns/or Follow-ups to items from Part A

This is a 2012 version of the FRQ, and it probably has been modified in the course of OB 407 B, OB 407 C, and OB 407 D (assuming "D" is the last so far). But the modifications are most likely in the details, not the form, not the general outline approach, and probably more detail not less.

Reminder: Part A of the FRQ is the completeness check and the Triage Criteria. Obviously there is little likelihood of "follow-up" required for items in the completeness check, so the references to follow-up in Part A are clearly to follow-up any risk indicator items identified by Sydney in the level one screening. This would obviously include examination of the RQ submission.

But how thorough the examination (review) of the entirety of what was submitted in response to RQ is not so clear. Probably has varied from local office to local office. And it may depend on what risk indicators are checked and to be followed-up on.

My sense: when a response to RQ is being given a thorough going-over, that is probably a sign that someone at CIC has some elevated concerns if not suspicions, and is looking for details damaging to the applicant's case, not details favouring the applicant. I am quite confident that if the applicant's case is not relatively made in the key information and key documents, which can be examined fairly quickly, that's when things are more likely to go off the rails and into the realm of longer delays.



Related posts regarding review of RQ submission:

Originally posted by bjones bjones wrote:

Is it true that all RQ responses are examined as part of pre-interview check? If I recall correctly, there were reports of applicants being scheduled to test in just a few weeks after submitting the RQ response. I am just wondering whether these RQs were processed in such a short period of time and whether there is any chance that these applicants will be scheduled to take the oath soon after taking the test if everything goes well during the test/interview...

I responded:
Quote Is the question about what is actually done or what the policy/practice is?

The policy/practice is clearly that the RQ response is to be reviewed in preparation for the interview.

In particular, the File Requirements Checklist not only specifically lists review of any RQ on file as part of the pre-interview check, one of the items specifically calls for a comparison of "addresses listed on citizenship application and those on the RQ and/or CIC records." Another calls for specifically comparing absences in the RQ response. While this is based on a 2012 version of the File Requirements Checklist, it is most likely still included (and to the extent the FRQ has been modified, may include more specific items to specifically compare in the RQ).

So, again, in terms of policy/practice, review of the submission in response to the pre-test RQ is clearly included as part of the pre-interview check.

How consistently, let alone thoroughly, this is done in actual practice, however, probably varies. It is always difficult to know precisely what any particular bureaucrat examines.

Part of why I doubt that there is a definitive conclusion reached about residency at that stage of pre-interview review, though, is that the more thorough, more or less line-by-line review, is probably done in the course of completing the File Preparation Template, which in the 2012 version of OB 407 was mandatory for all applicants given RQ (the File Preparation Template requires detailed observations regarding specified items related to residency, and it is not used for file review referrals for routine cases). That said, part of what may have bogged down the pre-test RQs in the GTA was that (unlike Vancouver for example), local offices in the GTA might have been actually working through the File Preparation Template before scheduling applicants for the test (and in that regard, may have left huge numbers wallowing in queue waiting for a Citizenship Officer to be assigned to do this, rather than someone more or less at the level of a case worker).

Some might attach a more determinative meaning to "review," as if to "review" necessarily includes reaching a more or less definitive conclusion. Perhaps it would be more clear to address the pre-interview check in terms of "examine" and "consider." Thus, that is, yes, all pre-test RQ responses are examined and considered prior to the test event interview, unless someone does not do their job (so-to-say).

There were, too, some very early on reports (going back to 2012) in which some participants here reported that they did not believe the person interviewing them had looked at their response to RQ. Whether that was a misinterpretation or miscommunication (meaning the RQ had been examined and the applicant's perception was wrong), or whether in the haze of transition to the new pre-test RQ process the in-fact-practice for examination of the RQ response was not fully implemented, or again someone had not done their job, who knows. But, in any event, the pre-interview check is at least supposed to include examination of the response to RQ.

I get the sense that some people think an actual person spends significantly more time actually working on the applicant's file than what I think happens. My sense is that not a lot of time is spent on individual files. I get the sense that perhaps some pre-test RQ'd applicants hurt the timeline in their case by submitting too much of a document dump in response, bumping it out of what could be quickly examined. I do not know this for sure. But even in the 2012 internal CIC memos there were references to some huge submissions received in response to RQ and how much worktime those files demanded.

Mostly, I think the amount of time someone at CIC is supposed to spend, usually, on a specific file, is quite likely to be a matter of how many minutes, or parts of an hour, or some other units based on less than an hour. Not how many hours. And I am talking about pre-test RQ cases here.

It is (speculating of course) probably not a triage process per se, but a more or less checklist approach with some specific things to be looking for as the (let's call the individual a case worker, though I have no idea what their formal title or position is) case worker conducts a pre-interview check in preparation for the interview. Indeed, that is the way the File Requirements Checklist is set up. There is a specific part for the pre-interview check and for the interview.







-------------
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: 14 Mar 2014 at 3:54pm

Report of additional document request given at interview:

Originally posted by tigercarpr tigercarpr wrote:

After the interview, officer handled out the form CIT 0520(10-2013E) to provide personal health claim summary and both adults's tax notice of assessment in 45 days and see judge later. What is the sign here? long-haul wait for CJ after supplementing new documents?

Part of what I responded to this post:
Quote This limited document request is a relatively new procedure, just implemented by CIC in the latter part of 2013. We have very few participants here reporting experience with this, and frankly it is way too soon to draw any inferences about what it means for most.

But it is not RQ. And that is important. It may mean some delay but probably not the huge delay incurred by those who get RQ, particularly those who get RQ after the test. Of course, if CIC is not satisfied after getting the documents, RQ could still come. But for now, the more focused request is a good sign that just a little documentation will be sufficient for the case to be referred to the Citizenship Judge in a file review, meaning the oath would be scheduled in the not too distant future.

. . .

[The applicant] should follow the instructions in the request as best [the applicant] can based on [the applicant's] best understanding of what they mean. A request someone else got may not be the same [as that given in the particular case]. Follow the instructions in the request . . . received as best [one] can.   




Another post about bringing additional documents to interview:

Originally posted by twocats twocats wrote:

RQs have been reviewed and are used as the primary reference doc at the interview. Do not bring anything they've already had.

Part of my response:
Quote First sentence I agree with. And, actually, that is largely what I elaborate on in some detail in a separate post below. But, it is worth emphasizing that the fact the RQ has been reviewed (examined and considered prior to the test event interview) does not mean that CIC has made a final determination as to whether CIC deems the applicant is qualified. See post following this one for further explanation.

However, I do not entirely agree with the second sentence: "Do not bring anything they've already had."

Even though the odds are that bringing additional documentation, beyond what the applicant is instructed to bring, will have little or no impact on how things actually go (what decision CIC makes), what to bring is a very individual decision and a decision to be made based on the particular circumstances of the individual case.

In particular, there is no harm in having some additional key documents handy, even if just for one's own reference, and even if they are never presented during the course of the interview. The CBSA travel history, for example, is something some applicants like to have with them when they go to the interview, even though now for all RQ'd applicants CIC should either have one submitted by the applicant or a report based on CIC's direct access to the CBSA travel history. (I would carry my own travel records, even though having submitted a full accounting of all travel in response to the RQ, rather than the CBSA records, but others appear to prefer to have the CBSA travel history with them. Others have spreadsheets which can illuminate their travel history in a manner organized for comparison with other information, like passport stamps.)

Other examples may be the original of a few key documents copies of which were submitted to CIC. No reason to bring a big box of documents (for most, there is no reason to submit a big box of documents in response to the RQ either). If a few documents are not going to be enough, a big box or even ten boxes of documents will not be either.

There may be no opportunity at all to present any additional documents. But it is a bit like having an air bag in the dashboard of your car: good to know it's there even if you never need it, just in case.





Additional observations:

I previously quoted the following report, but am quoting it again to give context to some other observations I have made.
Originally posted by bangloboy bangloboy wrote:

She looked through my passport and ticked off what I had mentioned in the RQ. As she was doing this we had conversations, she asked me what I do - and I explained. I also offered if she needed any documents and she said she was fine. After she verified my exits and entries she went on to ask what work I've been doing over the past 4 years. I told her where I worked and why I changed to my current job etc. One thing interesting I noticed was I had taken vacations to the caribbean a few times and countries like Cuba do not stamp anything so I brought my invoices - she said she understood that and didn't need verification! What she ticked off were places like home country I went to twice and other countries I went to for school related stuff. I will update you all once I hear further good news. All the best

I think I have previously posted the following in response to this (not sure where):

While CIC-Ccws*, including CIC staff conducting the interviews, are not robots and are not engaged in a merely mechanical exercise in working their way through the particular action they are taking on a citizenship application, including conducting an interview, what they are doing is far more formally structured and driven by defined criteria than it may appear to be in the course of what seems to be casual conversation, even chat. In particular, what appears to be casual conversation, or mere chat, is almost always a part, an integral part actually, of deliberate inquiry, specifically designed to put the applicant at ease for the purpose of obtaining candid information. Personnel in CIC, just like those in CBSA, are specifically trained for conducting interviews using a casual style of exchange. There are many reasons why bureaucratic investigatory interviews are structured this way (in contrast, say, to the more or less law enforcement style of a more formal, authoritative approach -- although, in practice, in many contexts even law enforcement personnel often employ the casual-chat approach in pursuit of obtaining candid information from individuals).

*Note: "Ccws" is my acronym for citizenship case workers, meaning anyone at CIC working on a citizenship case regardless of title or position.

But it is also worth remembering the more formal criteria aspect of their task. Interviewers may wander off the checklist path, so-to-say, if and when they see an opportunity to obtain the kind of information they are looking for. But mostly they stay focused on specified criteria, the checklist items. If their checklist (probably in practice significantly more extensive than the File Requirements Checklist itself), the list of criteria and tasks they are instructed to be using on that occasion (again, like at a POE, these probably are mostly standardized but in some detail may vary from day-to-day), calls for a comparison of specific information in two particular sources (say the residency calculator declarations and the reported absences in the response to RQ), that is what the interviewer will focus on.

REMINDER: Beyond the formal verification of identity and required documents, in many respects (but not entirely) the interviewer is looking for incongruities, inconsistencies, red flags, indications the applicant is or has been evasive or deceptive.

Thus, beyond the formal verification of identity and required documents, the interview is NOT so much about confirming the applicant's information as it is looking for holes in the applicant's information, looking for indications of something awry. Thus, there is no convincing the interviewer as such; there is either verification or the identification of a concern. To what extent a concern that is noted or which arises may be addressed by the applicant's responses, or perhaps even by the presentation of some documentation, is an unknown. Most indications suggest minimal opportunity to address concerns, often no opportunity to present additional documents. On a personal note, I brought and offered a photocopy of my new passport, issued since I had applied, and that was accepted. Even though the interviewer did not ask for this, the instructions were to bring such copies.




-------------
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: 14 Mar 2014 at 4:17pm

That's plenty. There is a lot of information in the previous posts. I have offered some observations. Much of this has been discussed elsewhere, and my observations have been elaborated on some in other topics. Not everyone agrees with anything I post let alone all of it, and I am no expert, so remember to consider any information here cautiously, always using one's critical thinking skills, and always verifying to the extent one can through other sources.

I had also intended to post a more thorough accounting of my own interview experience, but in going over my notes I do not see much that is not already well covered in the reports by others above; so I have selected just a few additional observations based on my own interview:
-- Interviewer had me sign my signature in her presence; obviously to compare to signatures on documents (passport, drivers license, and such) and in the application
-- Interviewer flipped through every page of both passports
-- Interviewer returned most originals as she completed examining them, comparing each of my originals to the photocopy I had submitted with the application; exception was the PR card, she held that to the very end of the interview, and handing me my PR card was the last thing she did, in conjunction with reminding me that I had to bring that to the oath
-- Questions about my work were awkward. Reminder, I am a freelance author and I sell all my work to a publisher abroad, and I must admit to stuttering a bit about where the company I did work for is located. And while she asked some clarifying questions, she did not seem concerned. I worried a little about this until the next day passed and I did not get a phone call, which meant that my oath was still scheduled to take place.
-- My interview took place inside a private office; no overhearing others being interviewed.
-- I was done, out the door, across the street and sitting in my car telephoning my wife at exactly eleven minutes after the time my interview was scheduled for . . . not sure how long the interview itself was. I had arrived fifteen minutes early and probably waited most of that before the interview. In any event, the interview went very quickly.



** * **   ** * **   ** * **   ** * **   ** * **   ** * **   ** * **


Again, all the reporting about personal experience has been much appreciated. I hope this information, and future posts about the interview experience, will be helpful, both to those with applications pending, and for those who are in the process of planning and preparing to make an application for citizenship.





-------------
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: montrealia
Date Posted: 26 Mar 2014 at 12:01pm
My husband and I had our exam and interview in Montreal today. We first did the exam which was very easy. Then we had to wait for the interview. They first called all the people with individual files. When they called groups, they would call one member at the time and consecutively (meaning that the same officer would interview the members of the same group, but one at the time).

In our case, my husband was called first. His interview was very quick. He got the pre-test RQ and the officer had spent time reading his RQ and was on top of things and she said that everything was very complete and there weren't much to check. I was called after and most of the interview went well, but then she had to check the passport stamps and that took forever (I travel a lot for work). She happily accepted some index that I made to help keep track of each stamp and trip.

In the end the officer said everything was OK, that the judge was almost certainly approve the case without any further inquiry, and that we should be called for the oath in 2-4 month.

I left with an uneasy feeling, though, because she wasn't very exhaustive at checking the passport stamps and they are just too many, I'm very afraid of getting an RQ myself...


-------------
Office: Guess!!!
Received: 25 May 2011
In Process: 26 Jun 2012
pre-test RQ submitted: 03 Aug 2012
PR card renewed: June-Sept 2013, no issues
Test: 26 March 2014
Oath: 7 August 2014


Posted By: rnvb
Date Posted: 27 Mar 2014 at 11:10am
I think this is more of educational thread not a regular thread to post one's experiences..I suggest that we keep it simple for other members looking for info on test event interview process.


Posted By: dpenabill
Date Posted: 27 Mar 2014 at 1:05pm
Actually I created this thread precisely for the purpose of posting reports about individual experiences in the interview and document check (usually at the test event).

So posts such as that by montrealia should indeed be appreciated.

And of course I added some information from other sources and some analysis.

One thing I did not do above is specifically detail what documents are checked at the interview. The instructions included in the Notice are quite specific and clear, so for the most part few should have questions about this. However, there is the open-ended supporting documents such as "birth certificate" item, which for most really is not something necessary -- I brought mine but it was not looked at, for example -- my sense is that this is indeed an open-ended item intended to request the presentation of any original document a copy of which was sent with the application, so that it is available if CIC has a question or concern related to it in particular. Remember, for example, some applicants are stateless persons who do not have a passport and so the birth certificate is a key identity document.

In any event, in terms of the actual documents, minimum and most important:

-- all passports (all relevant travel documents actually)

-- Two pieces of identification (preferably the same pieces of identification a copy of which was submitted with the application)

-- PR card

-- CoPR (confirmation of landing)

For passports, remember to bring properly authenticated translations if there is anything in the passport in a language other than English or French.

And, for that open-ended "supporting documents" item, probably best to bring the original of any other document a copy of which was included in the application, although this is probably not nearly as critical as the specific documents identified above.



-------------
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: montrealia
Date Posted: 27 Mar 2014 at 1:13pm
The purpose of my post here was also to highlight the experience of the CIC officer that took the time to read the pre-test RQ and therefore didn't ask much from the pre-test RQ recipient at the time of the interview. 

Because I didn't receive the RQ pre-test (even though my file is linked to my husband's, but he's the one who got it), everything was checked for me, specially stamps in the passports.

Regarding documents, let me add that between application time and test time (34 months) we renewed all our IDs, including the PR cards (because of normal expiration). However, it was not an issue that all for the CIC officer that our IDs were newer versions of the ones in the photocopies that we submitted in the application.


-------------
Office: Guess!!!
Received: 25 May 2011
In Process: 26 Jun 2012
pre-test RQ submitted: 03 Aug 2012
PR card renewed: June-Sept 2013, no issues
Test: 26 March 2014
Oath: 7 August 2014


Posted By: dpenabill
Date Posted: 27 Mar 2014 at 1:48pm
Originally posted by montrealia montrealia wrote:

The purpose of my post here was also to highlight the experience of the CIC officer that took the time to read the pre-test RQ and therefore didn't ask much from the pre-test RQ recipient at the time of the interview.  Because I didn't receive the RQ pre-test (even though my file is linked to my husband's, but he's the one who got it), everything was checked for me, specially stamps in the passports. Regarding documents, let me add that between application time and test time (34 months) we renewed all our IDs, including the PR cards (because of normal expiration). However, it was not an issue that all for the CIC officer that our IDs were newer versions of the ones in the photocopies that we submitted in the application.

Thanks for your clarification.

And of course, yes, drivers licenses and health cards expire and need to be periodically renewed, and this should not in itself cause any concern (and for those whose processing time has been particularly lengthy, this will be more common than not).

There is, however, what I would call smooth sailing criteria (informally of course). One obvious example: the PR whose place of residence has remained the same since landing, the same address which appeared on the CoPR. This is not necessary of course. But I suspect it is a small factor which perhaps characterizes a best-case scenario for smooth sailing.

As for the identification: in the best-case, best prospect for smooth sailing, exact same identification has virtually no chance of inciting curiosity let alone concern. But what I really meant by saying preferably the "same" identification, is that if a Manitoba drivers license and a Manitoba health card were submitted with the application, definitely preferable to likewise present a Manitoba drivers license and health card, even if it is the renewed version, at the interview.

Of course there are many other aspects of note. For example: address on drivers license should, of course, correspond to address of record at CIC, and of course be the individual's actual place of residence. And so on.

As I noted early on above, the focus of the examination is for verification purposes, and thus the examiner's concern is about confirmation, which mostly means looking for something awry, for an incongruity (identification from different provinces say), inconsistency (address or signature differs from what CIC has), discrepancy (stamp in passport indicating travel not reported in residency calculation disclosure), or something else which does not fit the picture.

Thus, for example, in examining stamps in a passport, the level of scrutiny employed undoubtedly varies from individual to individual, and in particular is probably relative to whether or not the examiner apprehends any reason to be more thorough.    





-------------
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: 28 Mar 2014 at 2:54pm

Originally posted by MOURA MOURA wrote:

How long u think it will take to know if u are scheduled for an CJ hearing or an oath usually..?? I have called the cic after one week of passing my exam and the agent informed that nothing been updated after ur exam and that since nothing been updated it means that u are waiting for ur oath date.. How much true u think is that ??

This a quote of a post I moved to the https://secure.immigration.ca/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=9440&PID=218349&title=citizenship-timeline#218349 - Citizenship Timeline topic ; I responded there.



-------------
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: 31 Mar 2014 at 9:30am

Following Instructions in Bringing Documents

In particular: Bring proper translations of any information not in English or French

I have often repeated how important it is to follow the instructions; indeed, if there is one phrase which illustrates the message I most emphatically and frequently offer, it is:

"When in doubt, follow the instructions, otherwise, yep, follow the instructions."

I realize that some feel as though this is condescending. Whether it is or not, the admonition to follow the instructions is well-warranted. The failure to follow the instructions is probably the most common cause for applications to incur delays and problems, and my sense is that this may cause delays and problems for more applications than all the other causes combined.

To illustrate, I copy part of a post by an applicant with what had been a routine case, who clearly had submitted an application destined for smooth sailing (scheduled for the test and on track for the oath in less than six months from date of application), who would have taken the oath this week but for a failure to follow the instructions:
Originally posted by kaladdin kaladdin wrote:

My local office is Mississauga. I passed the test with 20/20. Before the test started, the CO responsible for the test said that those who pass the test could attend the ceremony next week. So, I was really excited, but during my interview the Officer asked for the translations of my passport stamps. I had not translated my passports so she handed me this CIT 0520 form with the check box next to the passports ticked. She told me that there is nothing to be worried of as their office is quite fast in processing applications and that they have ceremonies everyday, mornings and afternoons.

(Probably, hopefully, this applicant will incur only a minor delay and just some inconvenience, a bit of extra anxiety but not much; but even that can be often be avoided.)

Foremost: while the manner in which the instruction is given varies, it is universal: any documents submitted to CIC not in English or French should be accompanied by a proper translation. There may be some exceptions to this, and it is not always applied, and often is not strictly applied, but the instruction to provide proper translations is clearly enough stated, and oft repeated, in CIC informational materials, notices, and other communications, there should be no doubt that if a document includes something in other than English or French, it should be accompanied by a proper translation.

For citizenship applications, the Guide itself clearly states that in gathering documents, translations should be obtained.


For purposes of the test event - interview, the verification of documents:
The only instruction sheet accompanying the notice I have personally seen is the one used by Mississauga; the formal CIC "Notice" form itself does not specify that translations are required (but again, the gather documents instructions do, and again it is virtually a universal instruction), but the instruction sheet which accompanies the notice (at least notices from the Mississauga office . . . which I believe is at least similar to what other offices send) clearly reiterates the instruction to bring proper translations. In particular, the instruction states that among the original documents which the applicant MUST bring are:
Quote Passports (current and all previous) and certified translations if any stamps/visas are not in English/French


I realize that I have stated this in a professorial manner, in the vein of lecturing. Most know to do this and do not need to be lectured. But it is almost always worth a reminder, and for all too many it is an admonition which, if heeded, can save them time and effort, help them to avoid significant inconvenience including delays, if not otherwise help some to avoid more serious delays and problems.

So, as I oft say, and will undoubtedly say again:
"When in doubt, follow the instructions, otherwise, yep, follow the instructions."




Quote Note: I am winding down the extent to which I participate in responding to posts in the forum. That is, but for occasional issues I may continue to discuss some, generally I will not be responding to most posts, including inquiries directed to me. Since, however, I am a jurist (a lawyer, just not a Canadian lawyer) and continue to have an interest in numerous aspects of Canadian citizenship and immigration law, I will probably continue to make occasional posts regarding developments in the law itself, including what I think are interesting judicial decisions.





-------------
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: rnvb
Date Posted: 31 Mar 2014 at 10:36am
Point noted.


Posted By: bjones
Date Posted: 31 Mar 2014 at 10:56am
Originally posted by dpenabill dpenabill wrote:



For purposes of the test event - interview, the verification of documents:
The only instruction sheet accompanying the notice I have personally seen is the one used by Mississauga; the formal CIC "Notice" form itself does not specify that translations are required (but again, the gather documents instructions do, and again it is virtually a universal instruction), but the instruction sheet which accompanies the notice (at least notices from the Mississauga office . . . which I believe is at least similar to what other offices send) clearly reiterates the instruction to bring proper translations. In particular, the instruction states that among the original documents which the applicant MUST bring are:
Quote Passports (current and all previous) and certified translations if any stamps/visas are not in English/French



Regarding passports, I was/am under the impression that only current passport and old ones that are relevant for the four-year period are requested for the test/interview event. I did not know that this test notice asks for current and all previous passports. What if a passport from 20 years ago was reported lost/stolen and replaced by a new one? I believe the replaced passport will have a note somewhere stating the reasons behind the replacement. Do people here carry all the passports (including those outside the relevant period) to the test/interview event?










Posted By: montrealia
Date Posted: 31 Mar 2014 at 11:44am
No, you don't need the passports from before the 4 year relevant period.

You need the passports that are from the 4 year period and newer up to present date.

In my case, the officer only looked at the passports that were relevant for the 4 year period, but she did ask when was my last trip out of Canada and I had my current passport with me (renewed last year) that I offered for her to see, but she was happy just with the photocopy of the first page that I also gave her. 

-------------
Office: Guess!!!
Received: 25 May 2011
In Process: 26 Jun 2012
pre-test RQ submitted: 03 Aug 2012
PR card renewed: June-Sept 2013, no issues
Test: 26 March 2014
Oath: 7 August 2014


Posted By: bjones
Date Posted: 31 Mar 2014 at 4:54pm
Originally posted by montrealia montrealia wrote:

No, you don't need the passports from before the 4 year relevant period.

You need the passports that are from the 4 year period and newer up to present date.

In my case, the officer only looked at the passports that were relevant for the 4 year period, but she did ask when was my last trip out of Canada and I had my current passport with me (renewed last year) that I offered for her to see, but she was happy just with the photocopy of the first page that I also gave her. 

Thanks! Let me just add that it would not hurt to carry all passports, including those outside the relevant period, if they are available.


Posted By: dpenabill
Date Posted: 31 Mar 2014 at 6:58pm

The instructions say to bring all passports. There is nothing equivocal about the instruction.

Practically speaking, CIC is only interested in relevant travel documents. So, a failure to follow the instruction as to a passport which is not relevant to CIC, will not cause a problem.

CIC decides for itself what is relevant.   

For example, I actually have all my passports going back four decades ago. I did not bother to bring any but the most recent two. I should say, I forgot to bring the older passports, as I had intended to carry them, separately. But I was not particularly concerned, and, as I said, did not bother to bring them, forgot to dig them out of storage in time to take to the interview. The older of the two passports I brought with me was issued years before I landed and became a PR, but it was still the one I had when I landed and was still my "current" passport at the time I applied. So I brought that and my current passport. And both were examined; indeed, the interviewer flipped through all the pages in both. (As is well apparent in the reports by others, the extent to which the interviewer looks at the passports, and other documents, varies extensively from person to person; note for example, the interviewer for me did not appear to look at all closely at the stamps in my passport, despite the fact that my residency calculation printout indicated more than a dozen trips outside Canada -- she casually asked if I had declared every trip and I answered "yes, other than day trips.")

For most applicants the instructions are overly broad relative to what the CIC interviewer will actually want to examine. I am certain this is intentional, so that if the applicant fails to bring a document CIC wants to see the fault is clearly that of the applicant. Mostly this is about bringing all passports which reflect any information relevant to the time period being assessed. Applicants can make a judgment call regarding what is relevant, but of course the risk is all on the applicant, since the instruction clearly states to bring all (in other words, the "I did not think it was relevant" explanation does not justify the failure to bring an expired passport which CIC wants to examine).

Again, it is absolutely clear that the scope and scrutiny of individual interviews varies extensively, so how it went for any particular person is only an indication of one example among many as to how it goes for others.   

And, actually, translations are a prime example: the reports clearly reflect that many applicants who did not bring a translation do not encounter any issue about that at all, no request for a translation, no delay in being scheduled for the oath. But there are many other reports similar to that by kaladdin, all was in order except for the failure to have a proper translation, resulting in a request for at least a certified translation, some reporting getting full-blown RQ as a result. A particularly telling example reported here last year was by a person whose spouse had non-English/non-French stamps in the passport, no question, but then when this reporter was interviewed (they had applied separately), the failure to bring a translation resulted in RQ (this was last year before CIC resumed the practice of making particular document requests rather than issue the full RQ).

And in this regard, actually I had two stamps (relating to one trip abroad) which were not in English or French, but they were clearly dated prior to the date I landed and became a PR, consisted of just a couple words in Spanish (and one of the stamps was not legible anyway, the other barely legible), and I did not worry at all about making the judgment call that my failure to have a translation for these was at little or no risk. But I approached this conscientiously, aware of the instruction, and was confident about the judgment call I was making. In terms of what is advisable, however, as I say again and again, the only sensible advice is to follow the instructions.

It is a bit like asking a lawyer if it is OK to drive ten km/hour over the speed limit. No, it is not. But sure, practically speaking there is usually not a problem, little risk of a ticket, for going ten K over the limit, and thus the lawyer saying that it is not OK to go ten km over probably drives at least ten km over the speed limit on many occasions. What about 12 km? 15km? The speed limit is the speed limit. One exceeds the speed limit at their own risk.




-------------
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: Canadiantobe
Date Posted: 16 Apr 2014 at 12:41am
Originally posted by dpenabill dpenabill wrote:

Actually I created this thread precisely for the purpose of posting reports about individual experiences in the interview and document check (usually at the test event).

So posts such as that by montrealia should indeed be appreciated.

And of course I added some information from other sources and some analysis.

One thing I did not do above is specifically detail what documents are checked at the interview. The instructions included in the Notice are quite specific and clear, so for the most part few should have questions about this. However, there is the open-ended supporting documents such as "birth certificate" item, which for most really is not something necessary -- I brought mine but it was not looked at, for example -- my sense is that this is indeed an open-ended item intended to request the presentation of any original document a copy of which was sent with the application, so that it is available if CIC has a question or concern related to it in particular. Remember, for example, some applicants are stateless persons who do not have a passport and so the birth certificate is a key identity document.

In any event, in terms of the actual documents, minimum and most important:

-- all passports (all relevant travel documents actually)

-- Two pieces of identification (preferably the same pieces of identification a copy of which was submitted with the application)

-- PR card

-- CoPR (confirmation of landing)

For passports, remember to bring properly authenticated translations if there is anything in the passport in a language other than English or French.

And, for that open-ended "supporting documents" item, probably best to bring the original of any other document a copy of which was included in the application, although this is probably not nearly as critical as the specific documents identified above.

How about the originals of the documents that we sent with the RQ? EX. TAXES, SCHOOL RECORDS, HEALTH RECORDS? 



-------------
Hoping to be Canadian!


Posted By: montrealia
Date Posted: 16 Apr 2014 at 8:17am
They didn't ask my husband for the originals of the documents that were sent with the RQ. They had looked at his RQ and they didn't look much as anything he had with him. 

-------------
Office: Guess!!!
Received: 25 May 2011
In Process: 26 Jun 2012
pre-test RQ submitted: 03 Aug 2012
PR card renewed: June-Sept 2013, no issues
Test: 26 March 2014
Oath: 7 August 2014


Posted By: dpenabill
Date Posted: 16 Apr 2014 at 8:37am
      
Originally posted by Canadiantobe Canadiantobe wrote:

How about the originals of the documents that we sent with the RQ? EX. TAXES, SCHOOL RECORDS, HEALTH RECORDS?

This is a common question among those applicants who have responded to a pre-test RQ and so far as the reports in this forum have gone, no one has reported an interviewer asking for, interested in, or examining such documents. Most seem inclined to bring them (best to organize separately from the original passports, PR card, ID forms, CoPR, and such) just-in-case.

I have not personally seen a copy of the notice sent to pre-test RQ'd applicants and do not know if it differs from the notice and instructions sent to routine applicants.

The main thing, after all, is to FOLLOW the INSTRUCTIONS, the instructions in the notice you actually receive from CIC.

Personally, I would (and did even though I had not been issued RQ) bring (again, organized separately from the specifically instructed documents) KEY documents, like CRA notices, proof of rental or home ownership, school records (albeit school records are also requested as part of the application now, so they would be included in the instruction to bring originals of supporting documents submitted with the application); I would not bring the whole RQ response (some have reported doing this, though again none that I noticed report an interviewer being interested in it), but stay focused on a few key documents. In my interview, a routine case (no RQ), the interviewer was obviously rushing through the process and focused entirely on the passports, PR card, and ID.

Reminder: the documents check interview is focused on verification, verification of specific documents and related information (stamps in passports consistent with travel declarations, for example; address on ID consistent with applicant's reported address, and so on). It is NOT a hearing, NOT an opportunity to make one's case, not an opportunity to present additional documentation or information, or to argue the merits of one's case. For those given RQ, that opportunity was covered by the response to RQ, and if that did not suffice to satisfy CIC, the applicant will have a further opportunity at a hearing with the Citizenship Judge.     





-------------
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: wkhan3513
Date Posted: 17 Apr 2014 at 12:22pm
Had my St. Clair Test-Interview recently.

Phase 1 was test - The officers were friendly and ushered us into the test room.
Test was easy - I read from Discovery & did a few online tests (googled) as prepwork. Got 20/20.

This thread was very informative - So I checked and double checked the documents that are asked in the Test Invite, and kept them organized.
A. Passport
B. PR Card
C. Drivers License
D. Health Card
E. Landing paper
I also took a clean color copy of each. I was expecting them to take a copy of my passport biographical pages & a copy of my Landing paper. But they asked only for a copy of PR card & License - Most likely because these were recently renewed.

For the general request - Which asks to bring the 'original documents which support your citizenship' I just took the key documents like CRA/T4 & Property ownership papers, but was not asked for any of this. Neither it seemed during the course of interview that I might be asked to show any of these. But taking the key documents served the purpose of 'Moral/mental support', knowing it is there with you.

My interview was 6 to 8 minutes long - The main focus of which was (As i had always expected) the time I stayed back in the US on H1B visa after landing. I was asked very specifically, when I started to stay in canada, and why was I in the US before that, which I explained. [My history : I had stayed about 8 months before I moved to Canada Permanently. And in those 8 months in the US after landing, I visited Canada many times for various reasons, visiing family, finding job, finding apt for the family to move in etc, which I explained ]. THIS I HAD ALWAYS SUSPECTED TO BE THE RED FLAG FOR ME GETTING THE RQ.

Another thing I was asked is what I do for a living, and when told that I am a self incorporated professional (self employed), he asked me some details about the projects I do, which I explained taking one minute. He seemed satisfied. He asked me if I did the same thing in the US before I came to live in Canada.

He verified the stamps in the passport against my entries and asked why there are no stamps for travel between Canada & US, I mentioned, that they dont stamp at the US canada border. The US Side usually stamps only once and uses a white form called I-94 - to which he agreed (nodding).

Another question was where I lived, becasue I have moved since replying to the RQ. I answered as matter of fact, then he asked me where I lived before, and when I replied he was visually verifying in the RQ paper which he had in his hand. He asked me when I moved and also asked me whether I received the test notice at the new address., which I replied yes, because I had updated my address on the Citizenship ecas online, after my address changed. He seemed satisfied.

After which he gave me back all the original IDs., and told me

' I am satisfied and will recommend your application to the citizenship judge, who gets the final word. You may expect to receive an invite for taking the citizenship OATH in the next 3 to 4 months, however it depends on the citizenship judge who may decide to call you for an interview, in which case the wait time may be longer. Best of Luck. Any Questions ? '



My Timeline Till Date :

Appl received - Oct 2012
Start processing - Feb 2013
RQ'd : May 2013
RQ reply sent : July 2013
Notice to Prepare for the test : Jan 2014
Test Invite received & Test (Test was 12 business days after receipt of Invitation) : April 2014
Oath : ??????????????? [Expecting - knock on wood - July/August ]










Posted By: cvv31
Date Posted: 17 Apr 2014 at 2:31pm
Here is my experience. I just took the test on Monday April 14th in Ottawa.

First the test. I found it super easy and got 20/20.

They were about 30 people so after test is completed,one by one, we all sit in the waiting room for our turn for the interview. I was one of the last so I observed other candidates.

Based on my observations: the interview takes about 5 minutes per people and some of them end up with a white paper in their hand (I figured out afterwards it is the instruction sheet you get if you fail the test).

My turn came and the lady officer was super nice and smiling. She asked me first my passport(s) so I gave my current and previous one, my PR card and she looked at my face to see if the photo matches!!

Then she checked my driving license and health card.

Then she asked me what is my job and how long have I been working, then she asked me if I had kids, how many and their ages (she asked the exact same questions to my spouse, separately).

Then she said I will be called for the oath between 1 to 3 months and I should wait for the letter.

She concluded by a happy "Have a nice day!"

-------------
Application Received: Jun 10 - 2011; In Process: Sept 7 - 2012; RQ received: Sept 7 - 2012; Test Date: April 14 -2014


Posted By: Sina2009
Date Posted: 25 Apr 2014 at 11:06am
Originally posted by wkhan3513 wkhan3513 wrote:

Had my St. Clair Test-Interview recently.

Phase 1 was test - The officers were friendly and ushered us into the test room.
Test was easy - I read from Discovery & did a few online tests (googled) as prepwork. Got 20/20.

This thread was very informative - So I checked and double checked the documents that are asked in the Test Invite, and kept them organized.
A. Passport
B. PR Card
C. Drivers License
D. Health Card
E. Landing paper
I also took a clean color copy of each. I was expecting them to take a copy of my passport biographical pages & a copy of my Landing paper. But they asked only for a copy of PR card & License - Most likely because these were recently renewed.

For the general request - Which asks to bring the 'original documents which support your citizenship' I just took the key documents like CRA/T4 & Property ownership papers, but was not asked for any of this. Neither it seemed during the course of interview that I might be asked to show any of these. But taking the key documents served the purpose of 'Moral/mental support', knowing it is there with you.

My interview was 6 to 8 minutes long - The main focus of which was (As i had always expected) the time I stayed back in the US on H1B visa after landing. I was asked very specifically, when I started to stay in canada, and why was I in the US before that, which I explained. [My history : I had stayed about 8 months before I moved to Canada Permanently. And in those 8 months in the US after landing, I visited Canada many times for various reasons, visiing family, finding job, finding apt for the family to move in etc, which I explained ]. THIS I HAD ALWAYS SUSPECTED TO BE THE RED FLAG FOR ME GETTING THE RQ.

Another thing I was asked is what I do for a living, and when told that I am a self incorporated professional (self employed), he asked me some details about the projects I do, which I explained taking one minute. He seemed satisfied. He asked me if I did the same thing in the US before I came to live in Canada.

He verified the stamps in the passport against my entries and asked why there are no stamps for travel between Canada & US, I mentioned, that they dont stamp at the US canada border. The US Side usually stamps only once and uses a white form called I-94 - to which he agreed (nodding).

Another question was where I lived, becasue I have moved since replying to the RQ. I answered as matter of fact, then he asked me where I lived before, and when I replied he was visually verifying in the RQ paper which he had in his hand. He asked me when I moved and also asked me whether I received the test notice at the new address., which I replied yes, because I had updated my address on the Citizenship ecas online, after my address changed. He seemed satisfied.

After which he gave me back all the original IDs., and told me

' I am satisfied and will recommend your application to the citizenship judge, who gets the final word. You may expect to receive an invite for taking the citizenship OATH in the next 3 to 4 months, however it depends on the citizenship judge who may decide to call you for an interview, in which case the wait time may be longer. Best of Luck. Any Questions ? '



My Timeline Till Date :

Appl received - Oct 2012
Start processing - Feb 2013
RQ'd : May 2013
RQ reply sent : July 2013
Notice to Prepare for the test : Jan 2014
Test Invite received & Test (Test was 12 business days after receipt of Invitation) : April 2014
Oath : ??????????????? [Expecting - knock on wood - July/August ]





I am still confused as to which documents to take for where it says original documents that support your citizenship application. I am a student at u of t and don't own a house or a car. I have my test on April 29th and don't really know which docs to take. Please help 




Posted By: wkhan3513
Date Posted: 28 Apr 2014 at 3:36pm
Hi

Other than the A, B, C, D, E and their copies I mentioned in the post, I would recommend you taking CRA NOAs / T4s / Paystubs originals. Although not needed but these are a good indicator of your residency other than the stamp entries in your passports.

If you are the RQ candidate, you must have already submitted a big pack to them, and you are not expected to take to the test/interview any originals of what you already submitted in the RQ.

Concentrate on the A, B, C, D, E and MAKE SURE you have all the stamps translated if not in English - this will be BIGGEST item.


Posted By: gary35
Date Posted: 01 May 2014 at 2:19pm
This is my interview/test day expereince for Vancouver BC office.  

Arrived early around 80-100 people for the test.  Its very orderly and they ll explain things to you very nicely-no rush.  You have 30 minutes to do 20 questions.  Dont worry about test.  Test is very easy if you studied the booklet and done some online testing.  They will explain everything how to mark answers and what happens after that.  Took only 5-6 minutes to do the test.  You cannot discuss questions or answers or anything about test-so that's why you wont find anyone telling you anything about the exact questions but the test itself isnt hard.  And you only need to get 15 out of 20 right.  

Then came the interview and verification of documents.  Checked ID went over the application_i had the CBSA report copy and gave it to her.  She only asked about one time that CBSA report didnt have but I had honestly marked gone for 2 days to USA.  Nothing fancy here.  I only had 35 days outside Canada so she didnt ask much about it-although there was one error ( I realized after sending the application once I got CBSA report) and she corrected that.  The officer was really ncie.  Only took maybe 5-10 minutes.  She made copies of an expired passport that was first used to enter Canada(I thought I had included that in my application, anyways...).  She said a Judge will confirm the approval and Oath is in 3-5 months.  I asked her how I did on test-I am pretty sure I Ace'd it-but she said we can only tell pass or fail :(  Nothing to fret really.  Just make sure you are on time.  Oh, no food or drinks allowed  only water.  Saw a couple of people with coffee that the guard made them finish or throw in garbage before proceeding.


Posted By: fox
Date Posted: 01 May 2014 at 3:28pm
Originally posted by gary35 gary35 wrote:

This is my interview/test day expereince for Vancouver BC office.  

Arrived early around 80-100 people for the test.  Its very orderly and they ll explain things to you very nicely-no rush.  You have 30 minutes to do 20 questions.  Dont worry about test.  Test is very easy if you studied the booklet and done some online testing.  They will explain everything how to mark answers and what happens after that.  Took only 5-6 minutes to do the test.  You cannot discuss questions or answers or anything about test-so that's why you wont find anyone telling you anything about the exact questions but the test itself isnt hard.  And you only need to get 15 out of 20 right.  

Then came the interview and verification of documents.  Checked ID went over the application_i had the CBSA report copy and gave it to her.  She only asked about one time that CBSA report didnt have but I had honestly marked gone for 2 days to USA.  Nothing fancy here.  I only had 35 days outside Canada so she didnt ask much about it-although there was one error ( I realized after sending the application once I got CBSA report) and she corrected that.  The officer was really ncie.  Only took maybe 5-10 minutes.  She made copies of an expired passport that was first used to enter Canada(I thought I had included that in my application, anyways...).  She said a Judge will confirm the approval and Oath is in 3-5 months.  I asked her how I did on test-I am pretty sure I Ace'd it-but she said we can only tell pass or fail :(  Nothing to fret really.  Just make sure you are on time.  Oh, no food or drinks allowed  only water.  Saw a couple of people with coffee that the guard made them finish or throw in garbage before proceeding.

thats good
did you have RQ for the 35 days you travelled?
how did you get the CBSA report?


Posted By: gary35
Date Posted: 12 May 2014 at 9:24pm
http://www.cbsa-asfc.gc.ca/agency-agence/reports-rapports/pia-efvp/atip-aiprp/req-dem-priv-eng.html

You can request it here or online.  No I didnt have RQ for entries but I did have RQ for name change-which I gave them.


Posted By: fox
Date Posted: 13 May 2014 at 8:50am
Originally posted by gary35 gary35 wrote:

http://www.cbsa-asfc.gc.ca/agency-agence/reports-rapports/pia-efvp/atip-aiprp/req-dem-priv-eng.html

You can request it here or online.  No I didnt have RQ for entries but I did have RQ for name change-which I gave them.

thank you for the link


Posted By: dpenabill
Date Posted: 13 May 2014 at 3:32pm
Quote did you have RQ for the 35 days you travelled?

Quote I didnt have RQ for entries but I did have RQ for name change-which I gave them.

I do not know what either poster really means in the references to "RQ" but there is no "RQ for . . . [this or that in particular]."

Perhaps they are referring to additional document requests, which are often specifically tailored relative to a particular issue. (Some people will refer to specific document requests as "RQ lite" or something similar; most understand this to mean there is a specific issue and if answered satisfactorily, no problem, but if not then RQ is likely and the case is likely to be processed as a "residency case.")

RQ is the acronym for "Residence Questionnaire" and generally there is essentially only one form. The reason RQ was issued (the criteria identified by CIC as cause for issuing RQ) is largely irrelevant (although, obviously, the underlying circumstances remain relevant); once RQ is issued, residency is being questioned and the applicant is called upon to submit comprehensive and complete proof of residency for the four full years (thus including proof of where resident even during times not resident in Canada).

(There may be slightly differences in the forms in use, as there have been various versions of it over time, and the French and English versions may vary slightly, but overall all RQs are essentially the same form, asking largely the same questions and requesting the submission of the same documentation: information and documentation to show 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


Posted By: fox
Date Posted: 20 May 2014 at 12:15pm
any tips of what the test questions look like? how similar is it to the one we have online?

thx


Posted By: ski
Date Posted: 20 May 2014 at 12:33pm
My experience: test questions are slightly different, but very similar to online test.

If you can make online test 100%, you will be able to make the real test 100%.


Posted By: in_cdn
Date Posted: 20 May 2014 at 1:38pm
Ski,
 
can you please give links to standard online tests you accessed.  Thanks a lot ! Smile


Posted By: pmm
Date Posted: 20 May 2014 at 1:50pm
Hi


Originally posted by in_cdn in_cdn wrote:


Ski,
 
can you please give links to standard online tests you accessed.  Thanks a lot ! <img src="smileys/smiley1.gif" height="17" width="17" alt="Smile" title="Smile" />


http://www.yourlibrary.ca/citizenship/

-------------
PMM


Posted By: fox
Date Posted: 20 May 2014 at 1:57pm
Originally posted by ski ski wrote:

My experience: test questions are slightly different, but very similar to online test.

If you can make online test 100%, you will be able to make the real test 100%.

the copies they ask you to bring along for the test, does it need to be color copies or black and white?
do we have to bring to photo ID still?

thx


Posted By: ski
Date Posted: 20 May 2014 at 2:55pm
Originally posted by in_cdn in_cdn wrote:

Ski,
can you please give links to standard online tests you accessed.  Thanks a lot ! Smile

I used these two:
http://www.yourlibrary.ca/citizenship/
http://canada-citizenship-test.aws.af.cm/

I made about 20 attempts in total, until I think I made 100% once or twice.

My result at actual test was 100%; there was only one question that puzzled me but I guessed it right.

Also, I would strongly recommend downloading the guide in MP3 and listening to it in your car.

I was very busy at work before the test, and I literally had no opportunity to read the guide even once.

However, I downloaded the MP3 (split into chapters for easier rewinding) and listened to it in my car the week before the test, maybe 6 or 7 hours in total.


Originally posted by fox fox wrote:

the copies they ask you to bring along for the test, does it need to be color copies or black and white?
do we have to bring to photo ID still?
I am sure that black-and-white photocopies would work just fine.

To the test, I brought the same two IDs I used for original application: my passport (with photo) and my health card (without photo). However, I did not bring any copies of these IDs.


Posted By: fox
Date Posted: 20 May 2014 at 3:11pm
Originally posted by ski ski wrote:

Originally posted by in_cdn in_cdn wrote:

Ski,
can you please give links to standard online tests you accessed.  Thanks a lot ! Smile

I used these two:
http://www.yourlibrary.ca/citizenship/
http://canada-citizenship-test.aws.af.cm/

I made about 20 attempts in total, until I think I made 100% once or twice.

My result at actual test was 100%; there was only one question that puzzled me but I guessed it right.

Also, I would strongly recommend downloading the guide in MP3 and listening to it in your car.

I was very busy at work before the test, and I literally had no opportunity to read the guide even once.

However, I downloaded the MP3 (split into chapters for easier rewinding) and listened to it in my car the week before the test, maybe 6 or 7 hours in total.


Originally posted by fox fox wrote:

the copies they ask you to bring along for the test, does it need to be color copies or black and white?
do we have to bring to photo ID still?
I am sure that black-and-white photocopies would work just fine.

To the test, I brought the same two IDs I used for original application: my passport (with photo) and my health card (without photo). However, I did not bring any copies of these IDs.

thank you for those info.Tongue



Posted By: fox
Date Posted: 21 May 2014 at 9:08am
Originally posted by ski ski wrote:

Originally posted by in_cdn in_cdn wrote:

Ski,
can you please give links to standard online tests you accessed.  Thanks a lot ! Smile

I used these two:
http://www.yourlibrary.ca/citizenship/
http://canada-citizenship-test.aws.af.cm/

I made about 20 attempts in total, until I think I made 100% once or twice.

My result at actual test was 100%; there was only one question that puzzled me but I guessed it right.

Also, I would strongly recommend downloading the guide in MP3 and listening to it in your car.

I was very busy at work before the test, and I literally had no opportunity to read the guide even once.

However, I downloaded the MP3 (split into chapters for easier rewinding) and listened to it in my car the week before the test, maybe 6 or 7 hours in total.


Originally posted by fox fox wrote:

the copies they ask you to bring along for the test, does it need to be color copies or black and white?
do we have to bring to photo ID still?
I am sure that black-and-white photocopies would work just fine.

To the test, I brought the same two IDs I used for original application: my passport (with photo) and my health card (without photo). However, I did not bring any copies of these IDs.

any photo passport we have to bring along?


Posted By: Zaffu
Date Posted: 02 Jun 2014 at 1:03pm
Hi dpanabill
I know you are very helpful and knowledgeable in this forum, I am following this forum from 2011.
My wife will have test on June 9th in Mississauga, she already failed a test and interview once, She applied again.
I am wondering if you can share something which will benefit her to pass the test this time, she is preparing with DISCOVER CANADA BOOK. Is there any online questions site which will benefit her or any other way she can get prepare herself, please let me know.
Really appreciated,
Thanks Zaffu


Posted By: dpenabill
Date Posted: 02 Jun 2014 at 1:22pm

Originally posted by Zaffu Zaffu wrote:

I know you are very helpful and knowledgeable in this forum, I am following this forum from 2011.
My wife will have test on June 9th in Mississauga, she already failed a test and interview once, She applied again.

I am wondering if you can share something which will benefit her to pass the test this time, she is preparing with DISCOVER CANADA BOOK. Is there any online questions site which will benefit her or any other way she can get prepare herself, please let me know.

There is another topic here specifically about the test and questions:
the https://secure.immigration.ca/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=15327&PID=222122&title=interview-testevent-id-documents-verification#222122" rel="nofollow - Discover Canada - post sample Q's here topic.

Much of what is there is, of course, dated, some very much outdated. There are numerous references and links to various resources to help. I have no ideas about how good any of these are (I was test-exempt, and otherwise very familiar with Canadian history, government, politics, economics, and so on, even before I became a PR, so I rarely gave a thought about the test itself).

One of the main problems is, of course, rooted in language ability more than the content of test questions. Practice will help in both respects, as to language ability and knowledge of Canada itself.

From what I understand, for individuals with good language skills and average or better test-taking skills, reading the book and going over some sample questions should make the test fairly easy. Some people simply have trouble with tests generally, and will need to practice more.

All potential questions, and answers, should be based on what is in the current version of the Discover Canada booklet, so the information in that is the most important to learn.

GOOD LUCK!




-------------
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: pmm
Date Posted: 02 Jun 2014 at 2:04pm
Hi


Originally posted by dpenabill dpenabill wrote:


Originally posted by Zaffu Zaffu wrote:

I know you are very helpful and knowledgeable in this forum, I am following this forum from 2011.
My wife will have test on June 9th in Mississauga, she already failed a test and interview once, She applied again.

I am wondering if you can share something which will benefit her to pass the test this time, she is preparing with DISCOVER CANADA BOOK. Is there any online questions site which will benefit her or any other way she can get prepare herself, please let me know.

There is another topic here specifically about the test and questions:
the <a href="https://secure.immigration.ca/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=15327&PID=222122&title=interview-testevent-id-documents-verification#222122" rel="nofollow">Discover Canada - post sample Q's here</a> topic.

Much of what is there is, of course, dated, some very much outdated. There are numerous references and links to various resources to help. I have no ideas about how good any of these are (I was test-exempt, and otherwise very familiar with Canadian history, government, politics, economics, and so on, even before I became a PR, so I rarely gave a thought about the test itself).

One of the main problems is, of course, rooted in language ability more than the content of test questions. Practice will help in both respects, as to language ability and knowledge of Canada itself.

From what I understand, for individuals with good language skills and average or better test-taking skills, reading the book and going over some sample questions should make the test fairly easy. Some people simply have trouble with tests generally, and will need to practice more.

All potential questions, and answers, should be based on what is in the current version of the Discover Canada booklet, so the information in that is the most important to learn.

GOOD LUCK!




As far as I am concerned the best practise tests are here: http://www.yourlibrary.ca/citizenship/

-------------
PMM


Posted By: Zaffu
Date Posted: 05 Jun 2014 at 7:57pm
Thanks dpenabill for your precious advise.


Posted By: mc_seem
Date Posted: 17 Jun 2014 at 1:22pm
-


Posted By: ronin21
Date Posted: 07 Jul 2014 at 5:18pm
Hello, I'll have my test in 3 days, Pre-test RQ. With my RQ submission, I submitted old and current passport copies along with original certified translation for couple of stamps in old passport (no non-English stamp in my new passport as of today). Do you think I should translate those stamps again and have it for the test day? I've read reports here that in most cases the officer has the RQ file. Thanks. 


Posted By: mini_k
Date Posted: 07 Jul 2014 at 9:29pm
Originally posted by ronin21 ronin21 wrote:

Hello, I'll have my test in 3 days, Pre-test RQ. With my RQ submission, I submitted old and current passport copies along with original certified translation for couple of stamps in old passport (no non-English stamp in my new passport as of today). Do you think I should translate those stamps again and have it for the test day? I've read reports here that in most cases the officer has the RQ file. Thanks. 
hi ronin21, I am also pre-test rq and had my test in March. I submitted copies and translations with my rq. I have not been asked for any new or additional translations during the interview. They had everything with rq.


Posted By: ronin21
Date Posted: 10 Jul 2014 at 4:12pm
Just took my test & interview today. Test easy got 20/20. Interview was very short, the officer was very nice and just asked what I do and where I went to school. The whole thing may took 3-4 mins. She just went through passports very fast and compared the first pages with the copies submitted with RQ (she had my RQ) and copied my renewed PR and driver license, no stamp check, no questions on travel or anything else. At the end, she said I'm good and my file will be forwarded to Judge for approval. Should expect the oath by 3 months. That's it. 

Just noticed something: with my RQ, I submitted lots of documents but organized them in tabs and different binders. However, I could see a binder (not my original binder) with filled RQ form and passport translations, no other major document there. I guess this means somehow they reviewed the RQ and only picked up what is important for them. 


Posted By: timing
Date Posted: 11 Jul 2014 at 9:28pm
Any info on what RQ interviews with Officers are like at St.Clair?


-------------
Application for grant of citizenship - Feb 2012
RQ documents package sent to CIC - May 2013
Test invite received July 11th 2014
Test date July 24th 2014
Office: St.Clair


Posted By: m_r_mtl
Date Posted: 17 Jul 2014 at 2:41pm
I just called CIC regarding my status and the agent told me they are scheduling a judge hearing for my case. What happens during a judge hearing? How shall I be prepared? I am really worried. Does anyone have any experience in Montreal office? Is there any topic in this regard?
Thanks

timeline: 
Application received  July 2012
Rq received             Nov 2013 on the test date


Posted By: canuck25
Date Posted: 17 Jul 2014 at 2:57pm
@m_r_mtl see my response in the Montreal thread.


Posted By: frustration
Date Posted: 26 Aug 2014 at 1:23am
Hello,

I have called for a Citizenship Test in September 2014. Before I got this letter, about two days earlier, I changed my address online. Will it make any difference if I go to the test in an office which is not now my CIC office.

Can I cancel the address change request or just leave as it is? Please advise what to do as i seems like a bad timing of the address change.

Thanks



Posted By: Ironmat500
Date Posted: 27 Aug 2014 at 4:03pm
Hello, 

I am December 2013 applicant. In process: Feb 2014. Got RQ May 2014 and responded with complete documentation on June 2014 to Scarborough as instructed in my RQ letter. Got Test from Scarborough (although my local office should be St. Clair) on Mid August. Got 20/20 on test. Interview was very short and she did check my IDs as well as talking re my job and cross check some dates from my application with my passport. I saw my RQ file there but she never touched it. At the end she said that my RQ is not been reviewed yet and they will send my file to St Clair for someone to review my file. She didn't say why i got test before RQ being reviewed and how long would it take for me to get the oat!

1- Is this a new trend/policy to invite for test before reviewing the RQs?

2- Why am I been invited to send my RQ response as well as doing test & interview at Scarborough while my office should be St Clair and now sending my file to St Clair for someone to review RQ??

Any expert input would be highly appreciated. 

Thanks, 

 

Originally posted by dpenabill dpenabill wrote:


Report of additional document request given at interview:

Originally posted by tigercarpr tigercarpr wrote:

After the interview, officer handled out the form CIT 0520(10-2013E) to provide personal health claim summary and both adults's tax notice of assessment in 45 days and see judge later. What is the sign here? long-haul wait for CJ after supplementing new documents?

Part of what I responded to this post:
Quote This limited document request is a relatively new procedure, just implemented by CIC in the latter part of 2013. We have very few participants here reporting experience with this, and frankly it is way too soon to draw any inferences about what it means for most.

But it is not RQ. And that is important. It may mean some delay but probably not the huge delay incurred by those who get RQ, particularly those who get RQ after the test. Of course, if CIC is not satisfied after getting the documents, RQ could still come. But for now, the more focused request is a good sign that just a little documentation will be sufficient for the case to be referred to the Citizenship Judge in a file review, meaning the oath would be scheduled in the not too distant future.

. . .

[The applicant] should follow the instructions in the request as best [the applicant] can based on [the applicant's] best understanding of what they mean. A request someone else got may not be the same [as that given in the particular case]. Follow the instructions in the request . . . received as best [one] can.   




Another post about bringing additional documents to interview:

Originally posted by twocats twocats wrote:

RQs have been reviewed and are used as the primary reference doc at the interview. Do not bring anything they've already had.

Part of my response:
Quote First sentence I agree with. And, actually, that is largely what I elaborate on in some detail in a separate post below. But, it is worth emphasizing that the fact the RQ has been reviewed (examined and considered prior to the test event interview) does not mean that CIC has made a final determination as to whether CIC deems the applicant is qualified. See post following this one for further explanation.

However, I do not entirely agree with the second sentence: "Do not bring anything they've already had."

Even though the odds are that bringing additional documentation, beyond what the applicant is instructed to bring, will have little or no impact on how things actually go (what decision CIC makes), what to bring is a very individual decision and a decision to be made based on the particular circumstances of the individual case.

In particular, there is no harm in having some additional key documents handy, even if just for one's own reference, and even if they are never presented during the course of the interview. The CBSA travel history, for example, is something some applicants like to have with them when they go to the interview, even though now for all RQ'd applicants CIC should either have one submitted by the applicant or a report based on CIC's direct access to the CBSA travel history. (I would carry my own travel records, even though having submitted a full accounting of all travel in response to the RQ, rather than the CBSA records, but others appear to prefer to have the CBSA travel history with them. Others have spreadsheets which can illuminate their travel history in a manner organized for comparison with other information, like passport stamps.)

Other examples may be the original of a few key documents copies of which were submitted to CIC. No reason to bring a big box of documents (for most, there is no reason to submit a big box of documents in response to the RQ either). If a few documents are not going to be enough, a big box or even ten boxes of documents will not be either.

There may be no opportunity at all to present any additional documents. But it is a bit like having an air bag in the dashboard of your car: good to know it's there even if you never need it, just in case.





Additional observations:

I previously quoted the following report, but am quoting it again to give context to some other observations I have made.
Originally posted by bangloboy bangloboy wrote:

She looked through my passport and ticked off what I had mentioned in the RQ. As she was doing this we had conversations, she asked me what I do - and I explained. I also offered if she needed any documents and she said she was fine. After she verified my exits and entries she went on to ask what work I've been doing over the past 4 years. I told her where I worked and why I changed to my current job etc. One thing interesting I noticed was I had taken vacations to the caribbean a few times and countries like Cuba do not stamp anything so I brought my invoices - she said she understood that and didn't need verification! What she ticked off were places like home country I went to twice and other countries I went to for school related stuff. I will update you all once I hear further good news. All the best

I think I have previously posted the following in response to this (not sure where):

While CIC-Ccws*, including CIC staff conducting the interviews, are not robots and are not engaged in a merely mechanical exercise in working their way through the particular action they are taking on a citizenship application, including conducting an interview, what they are doing is far more formally structured and driven by defined criteria than it may appear to be in the course of what seems to be casual conversation, even chat. In particular, what appears to be casual conversation, or mere chat, is almost always a part, an integral part actually, of deliberate inquiry, specifically designed to put the applicant at ease for the purpose of obtaining candid information. Personnel in CIC, just like those in CBSA, are specifically trained for conducting interviews using a casual style of exchange. There are many reasons why bureaucratic investigatory interviews are structured this way (in contrast, say, to the more or less law enforcement style of a more formal, authoritative approach -- although, in practice, in many contexts even law enforcement personnel often employ the casual-chat approach in pursuit of obtaining candid information from individuals).

*Note: "Ccws" is my acronym for citizenship case workers, meaning anyone at CIC working on a citizenship case regardless of title or position.

But it is also worth remembering the more formal criteria aspect of their task. Interviewers may wander off the checklist path, so-to-say, if and when they see an opportunity to obtain the kind of information they are looking for. But mostly they stay focused on specified criteria, the checklist items. If their checklist (probably in practice significantly more extensive than the File Requirements Checklist itself), the list of criteria and tasks they are instructed to be using on that occasion (again, like at a POE, these probably are mostly standardized but in some detail may vary from day-to-day), calls for a comparison of specific information in two particular sources (say the residency calculator declarations and the reported absences in the response to RQ), that is what the interviewer will focus on.

REMINDER: Beyond the formal verification of identity and required documents, in many respects (but not entirely) the interviewer is looking for incongruities, inconsistencies, red flags, indications the applicant is or has been evasive or deceptive.

Thus, beyond the formal verification of identity and required documents, the interview is NOT so much about confirming the applicant's information as it is looking for holes in the applicant's information, looking for indications of something awry. Thus, there is no convincing the interviewer as such; there is either verification or the identification of a concern. To what extent a concern that is noted or which arises may be addressed by the applicant's responses, or perhaps even by the presentation of some documentation, is an unknown. Most indications suggest minimal opportunity to address concerns, often no opportunity to present additional documents. On a personal note, I brought and offered a photocopy of my new passport, issued since I had applied, and that was accepted. Even though the interviewer did not ask for this, the instructions were to bring such copies.







Posted By: Ironmat500
Date Posted: 17 Sep 2014 at 2:11pm

Hi dpenabill

Could you please let me have your comments on my case which apparently has recently been experienced by many applicants?

Thank you!


Originally posted by Ironmat500 Ironmat500 wrote:

Hello, 

I am December 2013 applicant. In process: Feb 2014. Got RQ May 2014 and responded with complete documentation on June 2014 to Scarborough as instructed in my RQ letter. Got Test from Scarborough (although my local office should be St. Clair) on Mid August. Got 20/20 on test. Interview was very short and she did check my IDs as well as talking re my job and cross check some dates from my application with my passport. I saw my RQ file there but she never touched it. At the end she said that my RQ is not been reviewed yet and they will send my file to St Clair for someone to review my file. She didn't say why i got test before RQ being reviewed and how long would it take for me to get the oat!

1- Is this a new trend/policy to invite for test before reviewing the RQs?

2- Why am I been invited to send my RQ response as well as doing test & interview at Scarborough while my office should be St Clair and now sending my file to St Clair for someone to review RQ??

Any expert input would be highly appreciated. 

Thanks, 
 


Posted By: dpenabill
Date Posted: 17 Sep 2014 at 2:59pm

Originally posted by Ironmat500 Ironmat500 wrote:

I am December 2013 applicant. In process: Feb 2014. Got RQ May 2014 and responded with complete documentation on June 2014 to Scarborough as instructed in my RQ letter. Got Test from Scarborough (although my local office should be St. Clair) on Mid August. Got 20/20 on test. Interview was very short and she did check my IDs as well as talking re my job and cross check some dates from my application with my passport. I saw my RQ file there but she never touched it. At the end she said that my RQ is not been reviewed yet and they will send my file to St Clair for someone to review my file. She didn't say why i got test before RQ being reviewed and how long would it take for me to get the oat!

1- Is this a new trend/policy to invite for test before reviewing the RQs?

2- Why am I been invited to send my RQ response as well as doing test & interview at Scarborough while my office should be St Clair and now sending my file to St Clair for someone to review RQ??

Foremost, I am NO expert.

Secondly, importantly, things are often in transition, changing, and I am not keeping up with anecdotal reports these days . . . and am not even keeping up with changes in formal sources of information as thoroughly as I was until quite recently. For example, I was not following these matters at all for the ten days previous to today.

So, I do not know for sure that RQ submissions are still being reviewed prior to the applicant's appearance at the test and interview. We knew for sure the RQ response was being reviewed so long as the File Requirements Checklist inclusion of the Pre-interview check step remained the same (or mostly the same) as the FRC version in use in 2012. I believe, and strongly so, that there is still at least a very similar Pre-interview check included, with that to include a review of any submissions in response to RQ or other document requests.

Distinction: Words are often used imprecisely. The word "review" is, in particular, subject to various meanings. Some mean a formal review resulting in an assessment, a decision-making review. The word is also used in more generic contexts, such as in reference to an examination for the purpose of considering the information submitted.

I would be very surprised if an applicant's response to RQ was not, at the very least, examined relative to considering the information, before the test-interview . . . and again, this would be part of the pre-interview check.

On the other hand, the CIC person conducting the pre-interview check is not necessarily a Citizenship Officer, so that person's examination, or in a generic sense a "review" of the RQ submission, is not definitive, not a formal assessment.

Reminder: the interviewer is not a decision-maker; the interviewer's role is to gather information. (It is not the interviewer's role to advise applicants either.)

I cannot say with certainty what specific terms were used with what particular meaning at your interview, but my sense is that when the interviewer said your RQ had not been "reviewed yet" and that "they will send my file to St. Clair for someone to review my file," this was in reference to the more or less formal assessment review, which would be conducted by a Citizenship Officer. In contrast, I would bet a lot that either the interviewer, or someone else, had indeed reviewed (examined) your RQ submission (in a pre-interview check), and that it was considered relative to what deciding what questions you would be asked. As others have reported, the duration and scope of the interview varies from applicant to applicant, and while to some extent this variation arises from how it goes in the questions-and-answers exchange, there is undoubtedly some variation in what questions are planned for particular applicants, based in part on what is in the file, which includes any response to RQ.


RE Local office actually doing processing:

There have been known patterns in how CIC was distributing files in the GTA, but there are additional changes taking place the last few months which are likely to have an impact on how files are distributed beyond what we know, at least for now. There is no reason to worry much about this. What ultimately matters, of course, is what the facts in your case really are and how well you documented your residency in responding to the RQ.

Overall: if you met the residency requirement based on Actual Physical Presence, and documented that in your RQ submission, odds are that all is well and you will be progressing through the process significantly more timely than those RQ'd in the past.




-------------
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: Mississauga99
Date Posted: 18 Sep 2014 at 4:20am
I was given a paper at the time of Citizenship Test, it was not RQ but few details were requested like copies of Tax returns, copy of E-Tickets, copy of my business registration. Nothing else was requested. she said to determine residency provide these documents. I had only one passport at the time of the test for 3 years period. Does this also takes long like as regular RQ?
 
 


Posted By: dpenabill
Date Posted: 18 Sep 2014 at 9:35am

Originally posted by Mississauga99 Mississauga99 wrote:

I was given a paper at the time of Citizenship Test, it was not RQ but few details were requested like copies of Tax returns, copy of E-Tickets, copy of my business registration. Nothing else was requested. she said to determine residency provide these documents. I had only one passport at the time of the test for 3 years period. Does this also takes long like as regular RQ?

A particular document request not amounting to RQ probably does not result in a timeline as long as that for applicants given RQ. Indeed, this probably does not cause much of a delay for many -- in particular, if your documentation is responsive to the request, and verifies your information, there are reports suggesting that for qualified applicants this does not significantly delay progressing to the oath.

I say and emphasize "probably" because this procedure, the issuance of particular document requests, is relatively new (implemented some time in 2013) and is not explained in any sources of CIC information I have seen or has otherwise been shared here in this forum, so we do not know with certainty or in detail what the procedure is or to what extent it is handled differently than RQ itself. Moreover, while we have seen a fair number of personal reports by applicants who received such requests, the underlying circumstances in those reports vary considerably (for example, some are applicants who had previously received and responded to RQ). Some report progressing to the oath forthwith. Some have not reported a next step. And overall, the number of these reports is too few to support any definitive conclusions as to how these requests affect the timeline.

That said, some of the reports have specifically indicated it sometimes happens that the delay is quite short, some of those reporting indicating being scheduled for the oath in less time than a number of routinely processed applicants have reported.

And, of course how the applicant responds to the request, what documentation is submitted, and how that fits into the applicant's case (as in whether or not, or to what extent, it verifies the information in the applicant's file), will affect what happens next, which of course in part determines how long things will take.

My sense, in the vein of a guess, is that if there were overt concerns about the applicant's residency, RQ would be issued, and thus the request for specific documents is probably more about verification, a double-checking step, and one which might even be randomly issued for quality control purposes.




-------------
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: Ironmat500
Date Posted: 19 Sep 2014 at 11:30am
Hi, 

Thank you for your time & detailed response. 

Originally posted by dpenabill dpenabill wrote:


Originally posted by Ironmat500 Ironmat500 wrote:

I am December 2013 applicant. In process: Feb 2014. Got RQ May 2014 and responded with complete documentation on June 2014 to Scarborough as instructed in my RQ letter. Got Test from Scarborough (although my local office should be St. Clair) on Mid August. Got 20/20 on test. Interview was very short and she did check my IDs as well as talking re my job and cross check some dates from my application with my passport. I saw my RQ file there but she never touched it. At the end she said that my RQ is not been reviewed yet and they will send my file to St Clair for someone to review my file. She didn't say why i got test before RQ being reviewed and how long would it take for me to get the oat!

1- Is this a new trend/policy to invite for test before reviewing the RQs?

2- Why am I been invited to send my RQ response as well as doing test & interview at Scarborough while my office should be St Clair and now sending my file to St Clair for someone to review RQ??

Foremost, I am NO expert.

Secondly, importantly, things are often in transition, changing, and I am not keeping up with anecdotal reports these days . . . and am not even keeping up with changes in formal sources of information as thoroughly as I was until quite recently. For example, I was not following these matters at all for the ten days previous to today.

So, I do not know for sure that RQ submissions are still being reviewed prior to the applicant's appearance at the test and interview. We knew for sure the RQ response was being reviewed so long as the File Requirements Checklist inclusion of the Pre-interview check step remained the same (or mostly the same) as the FRC version in use in 2012. I believe, and strongly so, that there is still at least a very similar Pre-interview check included, with that to include a review of any submissions in response to RQ or other document requests.

Distinction: Words are often used imprecisely. The word "review" is, in particular, subject to various meanings. Some mean a formal review resulting in an assessment, a decision-making review. The word is also used in more generic contexts, such as in reference to an examination for the purpose of considering the information submitted.

I would be very surprised if an applicant's response to RQ was not, at the very least, examined relative to considering the information, before the test-interview . . . and again, this would be part of the pre-interview check.

On the other hand, the CIC person conducting the pre-interview check is not necessarily a Citizenship Officer, so that person's examination, or in a generic sense a "review" of the RQ submission, is not definitive, not a formal assessment.

Reminder: the interviewer is not a decision-maker; the interviewer's role is to gather information. (It is not the interviewer's role to advise applicants either.)

I cannot say with certainty what specific terms were used with what particular meaning at your interview, but my sense is that when the interviewer said your RQ had not been "reviewed yet" and that "they will send my file to St. Clair for someone to review my file," this was in reference to the more or less formal assessment review, which would be conducted by a Citizenship Officer. In contrast, I would bet a lot that either the interviewer, or someone else, had indeed reviewed (examined) your RQ submission (in a pre-interview check), and that it was considered relative to what deciding what questions you would be asked. As others have reported, the duration and scope of the interview varies from applicant to applicant, and while to some extent this variation arises from how it goes in the questions-and-answers exchange, there is undoubtedly some variation in what questions are planned for particular applicants, based in part on what is in the file, which includes any response to RQ.


RE Local office actually doing processing:

There have been known patterns in how CIC was distributing files in the GTA, but there are additional changes taking place the last few months which are likely to have an impact on how files are distributed beyond what we know, at least for now. There is no reason to worry much about this. What ultimately matters, of course, is what the facts in your case really are and how well you documented your residency in responding to the RQ.

Overall: if you met the residency requirement based on Actual Physical Presence, and documented that in your RQ submission, odds are that all is well and you will be progressing through the process significantly more timely than those RQ'd in the past.




Posted By: kisunja85
Date Posted: 08 Oct 2014 at 10:52am
Just had my test yesterday in Edmonton. Surprisingly, the lady conducting my interview explicitly told me that my documents have not been really reviewed yet and she has not seen them before either. Apart from standard questions (do you rent or own? where do you work?) the interview was more of a id and passport stamp verification event. At the end, she told me that I would be contacted should questions about my docs arise. 
One the one hand, the procedure makes sense: make the citizenship officer touch all the docs ONCE and have all evidence, tests included, to make a decision. 
But for me, it also means that I might expect an unwanted surprise in the mail (a.k.a. RQ-lite) and that is not nice.
is not nice.


-------------
Citizenship application

Sent 01/2013;IP:03/2013, Test 10/2014


Posted By: canuck25
Date Posted: 08 Oct 2014 at 12:28pm
@kisunja85
That's a standard response. In most cases the interview/test proctors are not the same folks who review and make decisions on files. What happens is that your file will be scanned, so to speak, or reviewed before the test if you're lucky and then forwarded onto the test proctor with case notes from your citizenship officer. Since the test is a deciding factor in how the review process is conducted it makes sense that they would get it out of the way and then properly, fully, review the file.

I recommend giving it a month and then requesting your GCMS/electronic file notes to see if there's been any progress.


Posted By: kisunja85
Date Posted: 08 Oct 2014 at 1:10pm
canuck 25, I did not know I was a majority :) My friends who had had the test this summer definitely had their files reviewed and the questioning was extensive. 
2-4 months until the oath is the timeline I was given, and I am fine with it. I just hope there would be no delays beyond that.


-------------
Citizenship application

Sent 01/2013;IP:03/2013, Test 10/2014


Posted By: greeny
Date Posted: 08 Oct 2014 at 1:48pm
Originally posted by kisunja85 kisunja85 wrote:

Just had my test yesterday in Edmonton. Surprisingly, the lady conducting my interview explicitly told me that my documents have not been really reviewed yet and she has not seen them before either. Apart from standard questions (do you rent or own? where do you work?) the interview was more of a id and passport stamp verification event. At the end, she told me that I would be contacted should questions about my docs arise. 
One the one hand, the procedure makes sense: make the citizenship officer touch all the docs ONCE and have all evidence, tests included, to make a decision. 
But for me, it also means that I might expect an unwanted surprise in the mail (a.k.a. RQ-lite) and that is not nice.
is not nice.
did you have all expired passports with 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: kisunja85
Date Posted: 08 Oct 2014 at 2:21pm
Yes, covering my temp (student) status as well as permanent status up to citizenship application. The verifying person was not interested in the current passport (received after applying) but did go over the previous ones verifying each and  every stamp against residency calculator. She also verified the date of initial entry (on a study permit in my case).

-------------
Citizenship application

Sent 01/2013;IP:03/2013, Test 10/2014


Posted By: dpenabill
Date Posted: 08 Oct 2014 at 3:27pm

Originally posted by kisunja85 kisunja85 wrote:


Just had my test yesterday in Edmonton. Surprisingly, the lady conducting my interview explicitly told me that my documents have not been really reviewed yet and she has not seen them before either. Apart from standard questions (do you rent or own? where do you work?) the interview was more of a id and passport stamp verification event. At the end, she told me that I would be contacted should questions about my docs arise.
One the one hand, the procedure makes sense: make the citizenship officer touch all the docs ONCE and have all evidence, tests included, to make a decision.

But for me, it also means that I might expect an unwanted surprise in the mail (a.k.a. RQ-lite) and that is not nice.
is not nice.

Originally posted by kisunja85 kisunja85 wrote:

canuck 25, I did not know I was a majority :) My friends who had had the test this summer definitely had their files reviewed and the questioning was extensive.
2-4 months until the oath is the timeline I was given, and I am fine with it. I just hope there would be no delays beyond that.

It may be that many or even most applicants are told something which, in effect, suggests that their documents have not been reviewed, but it is almost certain that the file, including documents submitted by the applicant, are screened multple times prior to the test event itself, including a specific pre-interview check, which among other things is specifically mandated so that interviewers will be able, where appropriate, to better address and resolve potential issues through questions at the interview.

The interview you describe is very similar to the interview most often described, including my own.

It is most likely that the statement about the documents not having been really reviewed is in reference to the review to be done by a decision-maker. The interviewer is not a decision-maker (usually), just an information-gatherer. The interviewer has undoubtedly (if the interviewer was doing his or her job) reviewed the file, but not in a decision-making or assessment mode, rather in a mode to identify whether there are questions, in addition to the standard ones (set out in the FRC), which could help the decision-maker assess the applicant.

Once the interviewer has gathered the relevant information (including responses to questions at the interview), the file, with the interviewer's notes, goes to a decision-maker for a review which will be an assessment of the applicant's qualifications, including residency.

That is, regardless of what impression the interviewer gave you, it is almost certain that your application was indeed substantively examined prior to the interview, and probably by the person who interviewed you, but not assessed per se, or in a decision-making sense "reviewed."

(My sense is that many interviewers have a style in which they deliberately convey a degree of detachment, in large part because they really are detached from evaluating the applicant or the applicant's documents, their role being to gather information not judge it.)

Good luck.



Interview and Related Procedures Revisited

We have not seen a copy of the File Requirements Checklist more recent than the one in use in the summer of 2012, and of course we know that OB 407 (which included that version of the FRC) has been amended multiple times since then, but the basic outline of procedure reflected in that version of the FRC is almost certainly still the one in use.

I say that recognizing that aspects of the currently used version of the FRC are certainly different in some important respects due to new procedural provisions which took effect August 1st. But, there is little or no reason to suspect that there has been any major change to the pre-test and interview procedure.

That procedure mandates a pre-interview check, and among its overt purposes (as reflected in the OB and in CIC memos discussing its implementation) is to prepare the interviewer for the interview.

Additionally, there was a review of the application done in Sydney before the file was transferred to the local office; while the purpose of that review is to determine whether a pre-test RQ should be issued, it is nonetheless a review of the file resulting in some notations entered into the FRC (which stays with the file).

With only one known exception (the one that provided us with a copy of the FRC back in 2012), it is my impression that CIC does not release a copy of the FRC to applicants (even if specifically requested in an ATIP application), so applicants do not have access to any of the notations entered in the FRC attendant that initial review in Sydney, nor in the pre-interview check, nor even the interview itself (the FRC has check boxes for all these review steps, as well as spaces to enter narrative comments). All the applicant is given in response to an ATIP application, relative to the FRC, is the concluding notations entered in GCMS . . . even if the applicant specifically requests the physical file.

It appears to be correct (though this may vary from local office to local office) that the interviewer is usually NOT a decision-maker but is an information-gatherer. The interviewer's review of the file in the pre-interview check, for example, is not to draw any conclusions about the applicant's qualifications, but rather to organize and sort the information, identify potential issues, identify questions to be asked of particular applicants at the interview. Then this person should be the one, ordinarily, to conduct the interview, but the extent to which this is done is unknown. The interviewer then compiles the information obtained, and that is in turn submitted to the decision-maker. Whether or not the decision-maker, at that stage, is a Citizenship Officer or not we do not know. And, in particular, it is most likely at this step that the new procedure adopted in June, taking effect August 1st, takes over.

If the file is then reviewed by a Citizenship Officer, there will be a decision to grant citizenship or to pursue further processing (ranging from investigations to RQ, or specific requests for addtional documents, called RQ-lite by some but such requests can be about matters other than residency and thus are not always a RQ-lite . . . they can related to identity or potential criminal or security issues, among other purposes).

It is possible, quite feasible actually, that the decision-maker at that step is not a Citizenship Officer, but someone in a position with some decision-making authority, and the decision they make is whether to track the application for approval by a Citizenship Officer or to track it for further processing.

For what applicants see, it does not make that much of a difference. Following the interview most routinely processed applicants will have their applications approved and be scheduled for the oath . . . some sooner than others, but most within a matter of days, weeks, or a few months at most. Some applicants, however, will not be summarily approved in this way and so the timeline after the interview will vary greatly. Not every wrinkle in the procedure at this stage will necessarily cause a big delay, but some will. We have seen reports from some applicants given follow-up document requests, after the test, who were nonetheless scheduled for the oath within a few months. And we have seen more than a few whose case still loiters on the darkside of an indefinite timeline with little information about how long it is likely to be.

Note: It may make sense, as you say, that the procedure is to "make the citizenship officer touch all the docs ONCE and have all evidence, tests included, to make a decision . . . "

But, CIC has trended toward multiple review steps for a number of reasons. CIC is careful to distinguish the one-step decision-making from a process of many steps involving an examination (which I would call a "review") of the file in the course of preparing it to be submitted to the decision-maker.

In particular, as I outline above, my sense is that the one step review is in fact done, when it comes to decision-making, such that a Citizenship Officer probably does not even see a file until all the information gathering steps are complete. But again there are nonetheless multiple steps involving some review of the file, including documents, along the way to that stage.

There are legal reasons why CIC consolidates the decision-making into such a single step, a big one being that an applicant is entitled to see everything the decision-maker sees and considers in making the decision. CIC does not want to share with the applicant what it does with the file in its processing steps, what intermediate processing decisions are made or the basis for them.

The ATIP provisions run into a wall, a closed-curtain, since CIC does not need to divulge its investigatory methods or tools. Thus, for example, it appears that the one known exception to CIC releasing a copy of an applicant's FRC was an oversight, not to be repeated. My sense is that CIC has, deliberately, effectively rendered the ATIP process quite useless except in certain limited circumstances.




-------------
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 Oct 2014 at 6:29pm
Originally posted by kisunja85 kisunja85 wrote:

Yes, covering my temp (student) status as well as permanent status up to citizenship application. The verifying person was not interested in the current passport (received after applying) but did go over the previous ones verifying each and  every stamp against residency calculator. She also verified the date of initial entry (on a study permit in my case).
do you have any self/un-employement ?


-------------
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: coldnomad
Date Posted: 08 Oct 2014 at 7:15pm
I have seen multiple reports here of oath invitations given on the same day as the test/interview. Which contradicts some statements here that interviewer and decision maker are different people, or that there is a "standard" between various CIC offices in terms of processing steps.


Posted By: kisunja85
Date Posted: 08 Oct 2014 at 10:48pm
Originally posted by greeny greeny wrote:


do you have any self/un-employement ?

No unemployment thanks to grad school. I did some freelance work for local consulting firms, so I submitted contracts and made sure those gigs appear on my Linkedin profile (just in case they google it :)). We'll see if that helps.

-------------
Citizenship application

Sent 01/2013;IP:03/2013, Test 10/2014


Posted By: greeny
Date Posted: 09 Oct 2014 at 12:10am
Originally posted by kisunja85 kisunja85 wrote:

Originally posted by greeny greeny wrote:


do you have any self/un-employement ?

No unemployment thanks to grad school. I did some freelance work for local consulting firms, so I submitted contracts and made sure those gigs appear on my Linkedin profile (just in case they google it :)). We'll see if that helps.
if it took long period of time , let's say 6 months and up, it could trigger RQ, otherwise I do not think it will happen , fingers're crossed , you'll get an oath letter instead!


Posted By: links18
Date Posted: 14 Nov 2014 at 7:53pm
Does anyone have a sense of how the interviews are going now that the citizenship officer has approval authority?


Posted By: ronin21
Date Posted: 17 Nov 2014 at 5:34pm
The interview process is almost same as before, not changed. The person who conducts the interview is not necessarily the same citizenship officer who approves your file. The sole purpose of interview is gathering information and verifying your documents. 


Posted By: RQed123
Date Posted: 23 Nov 2014 at 7:04pm
Hello!

I applied for citizenship in Oct 2012 and got an RQ Oct 2013 which I replied to.

Now I'm scheduled for a test/interview on Dec 2014. When i replied to the RQ I submitted translations of the stamps in my passport in foreign languages. Should I take translations of all foreign stamps with me again? or would they have it on hand, since they were part of my RQ reply? Should I add translations of any stamps of travel for periods after the RQ? (I applied for a PR card renewal earlier this year and again submitted translations of stamps but forgot to take copies of new ones)

Thanks,






Posted By: meeru
Date Posted: 24 Nov 2014 at 1:42am
Originally posted by RQed123 RQed123 wrote:

Hello!

I applied for citizenship in Oct 2012 and got an RQ Oct 2013 which I replied to.

Now I'm scheduled for a test/interview on Dec 2014. When i replied to the RQ I submitted translations of the stamps in my passport in foreign languages. Should I take translations of all foreign stamps with me again? or would they have it on hand, since they were part of my RQ reply? Should I add translations of any stamps of travel for periods after the RQ? (I applied for a PR card renewal earlier this year and again submitted translations of stamps but forgot to take copies of new ones)

Thanks,




It's okay. Just go back to your translator and request another copy which they will have on file. It is recommended to take them, most likely it may not be looked at. Good to have nonetheless!


-------------
APP RECD NOV.2009
PROCD SEPT.2010
FILE TRANSFRD ST.CLAIR OCT 2010
TEST WRITN JAN 2011
RQ RECEIVED FEB 2011
RQ INFO SENT MAR 2011
FINGERPRINTING JUN 2014
2ND RQ REQUEST JULY 2014
2ND RQ RECVD SEPT 2014


Posted By: Here4Good
Date Posted: 24 Nov 2014 at 11:49am
All

I have been a silent viewer of the forum.

Just wanted to update everyone of my timeline.

Application Submitted-----Jan 2012

Local Office----------Mississauga

Start of processing--------Sept 2012

Pre-Test RQ----------------Sept 2012

RQ submitted--------------Oct 2012

File transferred to St Clair-----April 2013

Citizenship Test---------- 24th Sept 2014 St Clair

Oath Date------------Dec 4th 2014 at Mississauga.

Thank you everybody for your insights and opinions and Good Luck to you all.


-------------
Application Sent:Jan 2012--Started Processing:Sept 2012--Pre-Test RQ: Sept 2012---Finger Print:Sept 2012---Finger Print Sent:Sept 2012---Waiting for Test Date----Local Office--Mississauga


Posted By: RQed123
Date Posted: 24 Nov 2014 at 2:24pm
Hello, when you went for the test/interview did you take all the docs you submitted with the RQ? (mine is quite a box full) or just the ID stuff? Thanks!


Posted By: Here4Good
Date Posted: 24 Nov 2014 at 5:51pm
Replied to your private message.

Went for interview on Sept 24,2014 and took some basic documents like CBSA records , application copy, IDs and T4s.

Agent in the interview was nice and only checked my IDs and CBSa records.


-------------
Application Sent:Jan 2012--Started Processing:Sept 2012--Pre-Test RQ: Sept 2012---Finger Print:Sept 2012---Finger Print Sent:Sept 2012---Waiting for Test Date----Local Office--Mississauga


Posted By: ejamal
Date Posted: 09 Jun 2015 at 9:55am
Hello everyone, 


        My test/interview is in a week. I wanted to ask whether any of you laminated their CoPR? If so, did you have any trouble during the interview because of the lamination?  When I got my CoPR I thought that it would be a good idea to laminate it, and there were no warning instructions against lamination, e.g. void if laminated, written anywhere on the CoPR paper. 
Could this be a problem during the document verification phase of my interview? I am asking because a friend of mine recently told me that laminating a legal document in Canada voids it, and I am not sure to what extent he is correct.

Thanks, 
Ejamal



Print Page | Close Window