Connect with us
Connect with us
In today's article, we will explore how to avoid unintentional mistakes in completing your forms and avoid misrepresentation in applications submitted to Immigration, Refugees, and Citizenship Canada (IRCC).
Misrepresentation can have serious consequences, including the rejection of your application or even a ban on entering Canada. By the end of this article, you should have a comprehensive understanding of the steps and precautions necessary to avoid misrepresenting yourself in your application to IRCC. Remember, accuracy and transparency are crucial for a successful and trouble-free business immigration.
Do you want to become a PR in Canada? At INGWE we could support you! Get a FREE email assessment with one of our licensed immigration consultants. We speak over +8 languages and we have helped applicants from +50 countries in their immigration path to Canada. Fill out our form, click here.
First of all, let’s understand what misrepresentation is in the context of immigration or visa applications. When we discuss misrepresentation, we are referring to the provision of false or misleading information during the submission of an application to IRCC. This includes concealing relevant facts, presenting false documents, or making untrue statements to gain approval for a visa.
Most of the time, applicants end up misrepresenting themselves because they could not understand the question being asked. On occasions, IRCC uses very specific legal jargon making some statements and questions easily misleading. However, even when these errors are not made intentionally, they can have potential short and long-term consequences for future immigration processes.
Do you want to become a Permanent Resident in Canada? Our licensed consultants could assess your profile against +75 immigration programs across Canada. Get a FREE email assessment by filling out our form, click here.
As immigration consultants, we continually hope for IRCC to simplify these procedures, making them more accessible for everyone. However, until such changes are made, let’s figure out a way to understand and answer these tricky and confusing questions correctly.
1) The first question we have seen many applicants struggle to understand and often answer incorrectly is: Have you or, any of your family members listed in this application, ever been convicted of or are currently charged with, on trial for, or party to a crime or offence, or subject of any criminal proceedings in any other country or territory.
While applicants understand the first part of the question is about being convicted or not, many applicants fail to see the difference between being charged and being on trial. Consequently, they erroneously believe that if they are innocent and not yet on trial, they should respond 'No'. The crucial thing here to understand is that IRCC is not asking if you are innocent or not, they are asking if there is a pending charge against you. Even if you are innocent, and you are not facing a trial in a court of law currently, if there is a pending investigation against you where police have charged you with an offence, the answer to this question should be YES.
For instance, in some countries, drunk driving may result in only a fine, yet it is imperative to declare this as a conviction in your application. The crucial aspect to grasp regarding this question is that even if you haven't been formally charged with an offense in your country, you could still be deemed to have been charged with a criminal offense if you have a DUI (Driving Under the Influence of Drugs or Alcohol) on your record.
2) We also see applicants providing wrong information when asked if they or any of their family members included in the application have been refused admission to, or ordered to leave, Canada or any other country or territory? To understand how to answer this question, it’s important to know the meaning of both of these terms, that is “refused admission to” and “ordered to leave”. Being refused admission to any country refers to a denial of entry, before actually being allowed into the country, while an order to leave any country refers to a directive to leave after having already entered. Refused applications can happen for many reasons, and they do not automatically predispose another application to rejection, however, if not properly disclosed, an officer can and will refuse your current application solely based on the fact that a previous refusal was not mentioned. Orders to leave, on the other hand, could be indicative of more serious issues, such as violations of a country's laws or overstaying a visa. These instances are treated with greater scrutiny and can significantly impact the assessment of your character and compliance with immigration laws. With this being said, it is also imperative to disclose such events accurately, as they provide immigration officers with essential context to evaluate your application thoroughly.
For example, in some countries like New Zealand, being 'out of status' or 'unlawful' for more than 42 days automatically categorizes you as having been 'ordered to leave,' even if you exit the country voluntarily.
In conclusion, If you have travelled outside of your country of citizenship or current country of residence, you should recheck all your entry and exit dates to ensure nothing of this sort is applicable to you. We would always suggest being extremely cautious in these scenarios and check the immigration regulations of the countries you have visited and overstayed in the past.
3) Another challenging question for some applicants arises when they are asked if they or any of their family members included in this application have been detained, incarcerated or put in jail? It's understandable that individuals who were detained and then released, particularly if deemed innocent, might lean towards answering 'No,' thinking their release negates the incident. However, it's imperative to choose 'Yes' and provide a comprehensive explanation of the circumstances in your application. The instinct to opt for 'No' based on the outcome of being released or found innocent overlooks the importance of full disclosure. Transparency about any encounter with law enforcement, even those that did not result in charges or were followed by a not guilty sentence, is essential not only to meet requirements but also to avoid potential misinterpretations that could adversely affect your application.
Do you want to become a Permanent Resident in Canada? Our licensed consultants could assess your profile against +75 immigration programs across Canada. Get a FREE email assessment by filling out our form, click here.
While filling out the application forms, clients usually do not bother about their travel history and think that it won’t matter much. That’s a very slippery slope. Let me tell you about an investor who wanted to come to Canada as a Permanent Resident but was refused due to misrepresenting himself.
During his immigration application process, Mr. Haque, a 33-year-old citizen of Bangladesh, seeking permanent residence under the investor class, encountered inadmissibility charges for omitting and misrepresenting crucial information about his previous studies, residency, and work history. The decision, rendered by the Immigration Program Manager in Singapore on May 28, 2010, led to a judicial review.
Haque's application, submitted in March 2010, failed to disclose his past residence and studies in the United States for over a year. Moreover, he omitted or misrepresented details regarding his places of residence, education, and employment history.
In response to queries from the Immigration Section of the High Commission of Canada in Singapore, Haque's consultant attributed the omissions to the assumption that a short stay in the United States did not require declaration. However, Haque contradicted this explanation in a phone conversation with a Visa Officer on May 26, 2010, asserting that he had disclosed all information to his consultant, who had made the error. The subsequent inadmissibility finding, under paragraph 40(1)(a) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act sessed the reasonableness of the Visa Officer's decision. The analysis of the case revealed undisputed facts, acknowledging Haque's omission of information about attending school in the United States for three semesters (from November 1997 to December 1998). This information came to light during the Visa Officer's review of the Field Operational Support System (FOSS), which contained details about Haque's past visits to Canada while he was in the United States. Despite arguments from the applicants claiming unintentional misrepresentations and attributing errors to the consultant, the court upheld the inadmissibility finding. Emphasizing the duty of candour for foreign nationals, the court affirmed that Haque's failure to disclose information, such as his year-long study period in the United States, discrepancies in home addresses, and work history, was a material and relevant omission affecting admissibility. The court rejected Haque's contention that he corrected the misrepresentations, highlighting that the discrepancies were only revealed when his previous Temporary Resident Visa applications were compared with the information in his permanent residence application. The judgment reinforced the duty of applicants to provide truthful and complete information, underscoring the potential risks associated with omission or misrepresentation in the immigration process. Haque's attempt to shift blame to his consultant was dismissed by the court, emphasizing his personal accountability as the applicant who signed the application. Ultimately, the application was dismissed.
In conclusion, understanding and adhering to these key principles can significantly enhance the likelihood of a successful application. This is particularly critical for business immigration applications, which are inherently complex and involve significant financial investments. Minor oversights, such as neglecting to mention a past visitor visa denial, can jeopardize the entire application process.
Remember, misrepresentation is not only a legal concern but can have long-term consequences for your immigration goals. By avoiding common mistakes, seeking professional guidance, staying informed about policy changes, double-checking information before submission, and addressing concerns with transparency, you are empowering yourself to present an accurate and credible case to IRCC.
Always remember that claiming ignorance of the law or misunderstanding legal terminology is generally not accepted as a valid defence. Being diligent is the bedrock of a successful application.
Do you want to become a Permanent Resident in Canada? Our licensed consultants could assess your profile against +75 immigration programs across Canada. Get a FREE email assessment by filling out our form, click here.
If you’re thinking about immigrating whether permanently or temporarily - you’re at the right place! Our team speaks over +9 languages, and we help applicants from over 50 different countries during their immigration process. Get a FREE email assessment, click here.
If you’re ready to apply and would like a 1-on-1 session with me or one of immigration team members at INGWE, you can also book a session directly using this consultation link.
