What is a Procedural Fairness Letter & How to Respond to the IRCC

A Procedural Fairness Letter (PFL) is an official communication from Immigration, Refugees, and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) highlighting specific concerns or discrepancies in an immigration application. It allows applicants to provide clarification, submit additional evidence, or address the identified issues before IRCC makes a final determination on the application.

 

Common reasons for receiving a PFL include:

 

  • Misrepresentation: Providing false or misleading information.
  • Inadmissibility: Issues related to criminality, security, or health.
  • Failure to meet eligibility requirements: Not satisfying specific criteria for the applied program.
  • Insufficient supporting documentation: Missing or inadequate evidence to support claims.
  • Concerns about the genuineness of relationships: Doubts regarding the authenticity of a spousal or familial relationship.
  • Financial insufficiency: Not demonstrating adequate funds or economic stability.
  • Doubts about intent: Uncertainty about the applicant’s true intentions, such as plans to leave Canada after a temporary stay.

Received a procedural fairness letter from IRCC? Don’t risk a refusal, that’s your chance to respond effectively. Contact our immigration lawyer in Toronto today for expert guidance!

Reasons Why You Might Receive a Procedural Fairness Letter From the IRCC

Receiving a Procedural Fairness Letter (PFL) from Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) typically signals concerns with your application that require clarification or additional evidence. Below are common reasons why a PFL might be issued and what each entails.

1. Misrepresentation (Intentional or Unintentional)

Misrepresentation occurs when false or misleading information is provided to IRCC, whether deliberately or unintentionally. This could involve discrepancies in employment history, education credentials, marital status, or any other details provided in the application.

 

Even minor errors, such as incorrectly filling out a form or omitting essential information, can lead to a PFL. Intentional misrepresentation can have severe consequences, including being barred from entering Canada for up to five years.

 

However, unintentional errors are also taken seriously and require a comprehensive response. Applicants must provide detailed explanations or evidence to demonstrate that the misrepresentation was not intentional and correct any inaccuracies.

2. Criminal Inadmissibility or Issues With Background Checks

Criminal inadmissibility arises if an applicant has a prior conviction or is linked to criminal activity. Even charges that do not result in convictions can raise concerns during IRCC’s background checks.

 

This issue is not limited to major crimes but may also involve minor offenses in the applicant’s home country. If you receive a PFL for criminal inadmissibility, it’s best to provide detailed documentation, such as police clearance certificates, rehabilitation records, or evidence that the offense is legally resolved. 

 

Explaining the context and demonstrating that you pose no risk to Canadian society can help resolve such concerns.

3. Medical Inadmissibility

Medical inadmissibility refers to health conditions that may harm public health or safety or place excessive demand on Canada’s healthcare system. Conditions such as active tuberculosis or untreated mental health disorders can result in IRCC issuing a PFL.

 

Applicants receiving a PFL for medical inadmissibility should respond with updated medical reports, specialist opinions, or evidence of treatment plans to address the condition. Showing that your health issue is under control and won’t strain Canadian resources can help overcome this concern.

Two young people handing document

4. Failure to Meet Eligibility Requirements

IRCC has strict eligibility criteria for every immigration program. Failure to meet these requirements, whether due to insufficient language test scores, inadequate work experience, or failure to meet residency obligations, can lead to a PFL.

 

If you receive a PFL for eligibility concerns, it is best to review the program’s criteria and provide evidence that you meet them. This could include additional supporting documents, such as employment reference letters, updated test results, or proof of residency compliance.

5. Inconsistencies in Application Details

These inconsistencies might involve differing dates of employment, mismatched addresses, or contradictory statements about family composition between various forms or supporting documents. Responding to a PFL for inconsistencies requires identifying the discrepancies and providing a clear, logical explanation with relevant supporting evidence.

 

Maintaining consistency in future submissions is also critical to avoid further complications.

6. Concerns About the Authenticity of Documents

IRCC may question the authenticity of submitted documents, such as birth certificates, employment reference letters, or educational credentials. Suspicions might arise due to incomplete formatting, missing verification stamps, or discrepancies discovered during verification processes.

 

If a PFL is issued for this reason, applicants must provide original documents, notarized copies, or confirmation letters from the issuing authorities to prove authenticity. It can be beneficial to demonstrate transparency and cooperation in resolving such concerns.

 

Receiving a Procedural Fairness Letter does not mean your application is automatically denied. It allows you to address IRCC’s concerns and strengthen your case. 

Have you received a procedural fairness letter? Protect your status as a permanent resident by responding effectively. Contact our Toronto immigration lawyer today for assistance!

How We Can Help With Procedural Fairness in Canada

Facing a Procedural Fairness Letter (PFL) from Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) can be daunting. At Kingwell Immigration Law, we specialize in guiding clients through this critical phase.

 

Our experienced team will meticulously analyze your PFL to identify potential risks, craft a compelling response tailored to your situation, and advocate to ensure your case is presented effectively.

 

For personalized assistance, please contact us:

 

Past Cases.
After appealing to the Federal Court, PRRA applicants from Israel reconsidered.

Pre-Removal Risk Assessment applicants from Israel. The applicants claimed to be at risk as an Arab-Israeli LGBT couple. IRCC rejected their PRRA application. We successfully appealed the decision to the Federal Court on the basis that the officer had refused to consider a news report of an “honour killing” in their family. The Court ordered IRCC to reconsider the application.

Musa v Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (2012 FC 298)

A study permit applicant from Iran has application reconsidered by IRCC after an appeal to the Federal Court.

Study permit applicant from Iran. IRCC rejected her application finding that her study plan was not logical in light of her education history. We successfully appealed to the Federal Court, arguing that the reasons were insufficient to justify the decision, and the application was sent back to IRCC for reconsideration.

M.M. v Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (2022 FC 1098)

Refugee Protection Division ordered to redetermine refugee claim from Albania because of wrongful criminal conviction.

Refugee claimant from Albania. For a decade, he fought his case with the Minister at the Refugee Protection Division, who argued that he should be excluded from protection because of a criminal conviction. We successfully appealed the decision to the Federal Court on the basis that he was wrongfully convicted in his absence, and the RPD was ordered to redetermine his claim.

Doresi v Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness (2022 FC 1300)

Study Permit application from Albania reconsidered by IRCC after appeals to the Federal Court.

Citizen from Albania applying for a study permit. IRCC rejected it, stating that her study plan was not reasonable given her education history. She requested reconsideration which IRCC also rejected. We appealed both decisions to the Federal Court and overturned the rejection, the Court agreeing that the officer had ignored her explanation that the course of studies was more specialized than her previous education and necessary for her career advancement. IRCC was required to reconsider her study permit application.

D.G. v Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (2021 FC 1468)

Conjugal partner PR application rejected by IAD returned to IRCC for processing after appeal to the Federal Court.

Overseas sponsorship of conjugal partner from Saudi Arabia. IRCC refused the application on the basis that they did not meet the requirements of conjugal partnership, and the Immigration Appeal Division rejected their appeal. We represented them on appeal to the Federal Court, and the judge overturned the decision, agreeing that the officer and IAD had improperly considered their individual and relationship histories. Their PR application was returned to IRCC for processing.

A.H. v Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (2020 FC 530)

How to Respond to a Procedural Fairness Letter

Responding to a Procedural Fairness Letter (PFL) requires careful attention and a structured approach to ensure your case is effectively addressed. Follow these steps to give your response the best chance of success.

 

  • Thoroughly read the letter: Carefully review the PFL to understand IRCC’s specific concerns and identify the requested evidence or explanations.
  • Gather supporting evidence: Collect all relevant documents, such as updated records, affidavits, or professional assessments, that address the issues raised in the letter.
  • Address each concern directly: Write a clear and concise explanation for each issue mentioned, supported by the evidence you’ve gathered, to demonstrate your compliance or clarify misunderstandings.
  • Be accurate and truthful: Ensure all statements and documents are completely accurate, as any inaccuracies could worsen the situation and result in further complications.
  • Seek our legal advice: Consulting with our experienced immigration lawyer will help you craft a persuasive response and avoid costly mistakes in the process.
  • Submit on time: Respond within the deadline in the letter to ensure IRCC has time to review your case before making a final decision.

 

The above steps sound somewhat overwhelming, which is why we can cover the response on your behalf.

Best Practices for Handling an IRCC Procedural Fairness Letter

Receiving a Procedural Fairness Letter (PFL) from Immigration, Refugees, and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) is a critical step in the immigration process. Handling this letter carefully can determine the outcome of your application.

 

These best practices maximize your opportunity to respond effectively: 

 

  • Do not panic: Take a moment to process the letter calmly. A PFL is not an automatic refusal but an opportunity to clarify or respond to concerns.
  • Be professional: Maintain a respectful and formal tone in your response. A well-composed and factual letter leaves a better impression on the immigration officer handling your case.
  • Stay factual and avoid emotional language: When addressing concerns, stick to the facts. Avoid emotional appeals and focus on providing clear and logical explanations supported by evidence.
  • Organize documents and explanations logically: Present your response in a structured manner, ensuring that each concern raised in the letter is addressed with corresponding evidence.
  • Ensure all evidence is properly certified or translated if necessary: If documents are in a language other than English or French, provide certified translations. This ensures the immigration officer can review your response without delays.

 

Failing to respond adequately to a procedural fairness letter or missing the deadline to submit your response may lead to application refusal. If you’re unsure how to craft an effective response, consulting our experienced immigration lawyer in Canada can make all the difference.

 

A proper response to IRCC’s concerns is your best chance to resolve the issues and continue with your immigration process.

I want to thank Christian Julien for the wonderful work he did for me and my family. He is a very intelligent, transparent and dedicated person in his work. Without a doubt, he is the best.

Merit Garcia

From the day my family and I started working with Christian Julian on our complicated immigration process, he has been humble, attentive and kind in dealing with our case. Christian is always responsive and goes above and beyond to help us understand the complicated immigration process and other regulations that had an impact on our case. With Christian, we always felt safe and very well taken care of! Our application for PR and then spousal sponsorship was processed with a great deal of attention to detail and extra care. The applications that were submitted were thorough and were never returned or delayed due to missing information/ documents or incorrectly filled forms. We cannot thank him enough for his diligence and professionalism!

I highly recommend Kingwell Immigration Law firm for any immigration-related legal representation anyone may require in Canada.

Nisan G. Woldeabzghi

Our immigration case was rather peculiar. But, having been introduced to Daniel Kingwell at a later stage in the process, we have had nothing but outstanding, professional help in all our legal matters. The knowledge of Mr. Kingwell regarding immigration matters is second to none, and his team is truly amazing. Not only is Mr. Kingwell’s knowledge and experience extremely extensive, but how he makes his clients feel at ease is beyond anything that we have had the experience of dealing with (having met a whole tranche of lawyers, I can safely testify to that). I would recommend Mr. Kingwell for all immigration-related matters.

Haseeb A Virk

Thank you Daniel for doing a great job!!! My student visa application was refused two times and the Embassy ignored my third request too. Honestly, I was hopeless in 2019 and could not even imagine that someday the court would grant leave and my passport would have a visa on it. Everything happened because of Daniel Kingwell who prepared the best arguments and defended my case with great professionalism. I am so grateful for your support Daniel. I would recommend your firm to everyone who needs legal services because you guys deserve to be appreciated!

Daniela Gega

I highly recommend Mr. Daniel Kingwell for his exceptional legal expertise. Facing a complex situation, Mr. Kingwell provided clarity and support. His polite demeanour and reliability were evident throughout our interactions. He assured me of the strength of my case and diligently worked to secure its approval, patiently assembling all the documents. Mr. Kingwell’s honesty and integrity are commendable traits that instilled trust in his counsel. Additionally, his assistant, Naheed Sultana, played a crucial role in the process. Naheed’s quick and attentive responses to my inquiries demonstrated her dedication and professionalism. Together, they make an amazing and friendly team that gets the job done. Many thanks to Mr. Daniel Kingwell and Naheed Sultana for their invaluable service.

Ali Abdulrazak

Procedural Fairness Letter Reply Sample

Below is a hypothetical reply template addressing common concerns such as document authenticity, misrepresentation claims, and medical inadmissibility.

 

Subject: Response to Procedural Fairness Letter – Application [Your Application Number]

 

Date: [Insert Date]

 

To: Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC)

 

Introduction:
Dear Officer,

I am writing in response to the Procedural Fairness Letter dated [Insert Date] regarding my application for [Specify Visa Type, e.g., Permanent Residence]. I fully acknowledge the concerns outlined and wish to reaffirm my commitment to providing accurate and truthful information in accordance with Canada’s immigration policies.

 

Address Specific Concerns:

 

  1. Document Authenticity:
    The PFL raised concerns regarding the authenticity of my [Specify Document, e.g., Employment Letter]. I confirm that this document is genuine and has been issued by [Employer’s Name]. I have attached a notarized copy of the original letter and a verification statement from [Employer’s Name] to address this concern.

  2. Misrepresentation Claims:
    The letter suggests potential misrepresentation related to [e.g., my education credentials]. This discrepancy may have arisen due to [Specify Reason, e.g., a clerical error]. I have provided certified copies of my degree certificate and an official transcript directly from [Educational Institution] to verify the accuracy of my claim.

  3. Medical Inadmissibility:
    Regarding concerns about medical inadmissibility due to [Specify Condition], I have attached updated medical reports and a statement from [Medical Specialist]. These documents confirm that the condition is under control and will not pose a burden on Canada’s healthcare system.

 

Conclusion:
I appreciate the opportunity to address these concerns and provide the required clarifications. Please do not hesitate to contact me if additional information is needed. I am committed to fully cooperating with IRCC to ensure the accuracy of my application. Thank you for your time and consideration.

 

Attachments:

  • Notarized copy of [Specify Document].
  • Verification letter from [Employer’s Name].
  • Certified copies of [Specify Documents].
  • Updated medical report and specialist statement.

 

Sincerely,
[Your Full Name]
[Your Contact Information]
[Your Signature, if submitting physically]

 

Disclaimer: This sample serves as a structured example of how to respond to a Procedural Fairness Letter and is not legal advice. Always ensure your reply is tailored to your specific situation and includes all requested documentation. 

Reach Out Today For Expert Legal Guidance

If you’ve received this letter, time is of the essence. A clear, professional, and well-supported response is critical to safeguarding your immigration application.

 

Our experienced immigration lawyers can guide you through every step, from addressing concerns about misrepresentation or medical inadmissibility to submitting a detailed response that strengthens your case.

Contact us at 416.988.8853 to schedule a free consultation with us. 

A procedural fairness letter may impact your immigration status. Contact our immigration lawyer in Toronto to ensure your response is strong and effective!

FAQs

What is the processing time for a procedural fairness letter?

The processing time for a procedural fairness letter (PFL) response varies depending on the case’s difficulty and IRCC’s workload. Generally, applicants are given 7 to 30 days to respond, and IRCC may take several weeks or months to review the submission and issue a decision.

 

Once IRCC receives your response, they will carefully assess the evidence and explanations provided. The time taken depends on the number of concerns raised, the volume of applications under review, and the specific program you applied for, such as express entry or a temporary resident visa.

 

Working with an immigration lawyer can help streamline this process.

After responding to a procedural fairness letter, IRCC reviews your explanations and evidence to address their concerns. The outcome may include approval, refusal, or further requests for clarification. Your response’s quality and timeliness play a key role in determining whether your application progresses or is denied.

 

IRCC’s decision process depends on the specifics of the issues raised and the supporting evidence submitted. If concerns are resolved, the application advances; if not, it may be refused. Applicants who face rejection may seek legal recourse, including appeals, through venues like the Federal Court of Canada.

Due process and procedural fairness are related but distinct. Procedural fairness focuses on ensuring fair treatment in administrative decisions, like immigration cases, while due process is broader, protecting fairness in judicial proceedings, including criminal and civil cases. Both aim to uphold individual rights but apply in different contexts.