Hi all, would like a bit of advice on applying for an eTA for my dad to come visit. If Former Lancastrian is around and has a few mins would be grateful for a reply also.

My dads a British National, British passport holder, visited Canada numerous times, most recently in 2015 for my wedding.

Now with introduction of eTA I'm unsure if he will be allowed in.

In 1989 he had a court case start and end in approx April 1990 where he was given 100hours community service for Reckless driving.
This was completed. Since it was so long ago he has no paperwork regarding this period, also being somewhat illiterate he never thought he would need it.

In 2006 he was arrested for DUI and given a 12month suspended license (Feb 6th 2006), reduced to 9months on completion of the applicable road awareness course. This was completed and he has the certificate for it. However has nothing for the conviction itself.

I assume CIC will ask for additional information in regards to the above when we apply for his eTA (eTA states to declare anything and everything regardless of the time or if its spent).

I applied to ACRO for a police cert assuming they would have all the info documented and so we could submit it with the eTA. Both incidents were declared to best of our knowledge.

We received the certificate on which they have
Offence 1 driving a motor vehicle with excess alcohol on 19th Jan 2006. Disposal as outlined above plus a fine.

There is no mention of the incident in 1989/1990.
I had called the court house who advised to submit a letter for the case information, noting they may have nothing on record as it was way back and was pretty much all paper records. They sent a letter back stating they can't find anything under my dads name for that incident.

So the questions -- I'm unsure if my dad is eligible to apply for eTA? If asked for information regarding the 1989/1990 he has nothing further, and the courts don't either.

I want to try get him the eTA soon as possible as my wife and I are having a baby and of course want my dad to be able to visit.

Any help on the above is appreciated. Apologies for the length of post

He does the eTA application online and answers Yes to the arrests/convictions questions. He will then provide any documentation requested such as the police certificate and letter from the court regarding the offences.
Based on posted above he will have one indictable conviction. The 10 year deemed rehabilitated would commence after the 9 month suspension ended so its quite possible he would still be inadmissible during a portion of 2017.
All he can do is apply and see what is said or requested. He could apply for individual rehabilitation but as he is close to being deemed IRCC (CIC) could overlook this and issue a letter or issue a letter of rehabilitation (doubtful) and request the $200 fee.
Its tricky because of the 10 yr deemed period being close but not quite there how they will deal with it.

Application for rehabilitation link
Application for Rehabilitation for Persons Who Are Inadmissible to Canada Because of Past Criminal Activity

Cheers for the reply.
If we waited another month or so before applying it would for sure be past the 10year mark since the suspension ended. Would he still have to apply for rehabilitation?

The 10 years is from the completion of any sentence imposed so for example

Sentenced in court to a 9 month driving ban on 4 Jan 2006. The 10 yrs starts from 4 Oct 2006.

If you were convicted of an offence outside Canada that, if committed in Canada, would be an indictable offence punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of less than ten years:

You are deemed rehabilitated: at least ten years after completion of the sentence imposed.
You are eligible to apply for rehabilitation: five (5) years after completion of the sentence imposed.


Rehabilitation for Persons Who Are Inadmissible to Canada Because of Past Criminal Activity

Folks thank you for the replies. Its much appreciated.

Would being deemed rehabilitated apply for my dad after the 10years even though he had the issue in 1989/1990 also?

Wouldn't the fact that he has visited Canada "several times", most recently in 2015, rather suggest that he has committed fraud by not declaring his 2006 DUI conviction on previous occasions? Just curious.

Good point, would it?
Until eTA came into effect we honestly had no idea he would be inadmissible.
Saying that on atleast one of the trips from UK to Canada I was with my dad and at Border Control something was asked around convictions and we did say yes DUI. But there was nothing further to it. That was back in 2008 I think

Prior to eTA being introduced last year and now in full force since November 2016 a person wishing to visit Canada and holding a visa exempt passport simply booked a flight to Canada and showed up. No forms to fill out or submit prior to or on entry.
CBSA officers were instructed not to ask all arriving foreign nationals (visitors) about arrests and convictions or a criminal record at Primary inspection however these questions could be asked during an Immigration secondary examination.
The Government thought it inappropriate and not Canadian to ask visitors about if they had a criminal record as some people would take offence.

So if they were never asked the question directly about arrests, charges and convictions then we couldn't do anything even if they knew they were inadmissible and didn't disclose it.

Now with eTA they have to answer the following question on the online application form
Have you ever committed, been arrested for, been charged with or convicted of any criminal offence in any country?
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/pdf/eta/english.pdf

So if they answer Yes they will have to provide details before eTA is issued.
The form instructions say the following;
Please provide as many details as possible. Failure to include additional and sufficient details may result in slower processing.

If the person answers No and we later find out they LIED (Am I allowed to use that word?) then we can use misrepresentation as an inadmissibility for future visits or if discovered on entry issue them with an EXCLUSION ORDER for 12 months for non compliance with the Act or refer them for an Admissibility Hearing and if convicted of a criminal offence serious or minor offence then get the IRB member to issue a DEPORTATION ORDER.

Rarely would criminal charges be laid against the individual so we tend to use the Immigration Act as opposed to a Criminal Code of Canada charge.

While most of us would call it fraud IRCC (CIC) prefer the softer tone of misrepresentation.

Just an update for anyone who read/replied to this thread.
eTa Application was submitted Mid Jan.
Had some initial issues linking the application to the My CIC portal (user error).
Cancelled original application.
Re applied a week later and asked to provide Police Cert (which we had already applied for).
Uploaded Police Cert and last week got confirmation that eTa has been approved.
All in all took roughly 5-6weeks.

Thank you Former Lancastrian for your input - it's greatly appreciated.

I have a question that relates to this as well.

I have applied for information only and been told that due to the ROA I am admissible to Canada despite my former caution.

However, the did not provide an indication as to whether I tick yes or no when I apply for the ETA.

Can anyone shed some light on this issues? Due to my rehabilitation I am assuming that I can tick NO....

Many thanks

Rehabilitation of Offenders Act is British law, and does not apply to Canada.

Answer the form honestly. Answering that you hadn't been arrested when you have, or that you hadn't been convicted of something if you have is a much bigger deal than disclosing a lot of old, minor offences.

+1. You can't answer 'no' on the form, as it wouldn't be correct.

This is the question asked on the eTA application

Have you ever committed, been arrested for, been charged with or convicted of any criminal offence in any country?

Do you see anything about rehabilitation?
Sure you might be admissible because rehabilitation is relevant but the answer is in several parts.

Many people are arrested and charged with offences but never convicted.
Many are arrested and never charged.
Many are charged but never arrested.
Many commit criminal offences but have never been arrested,charged or convicted.

INADMISSIBILITY is based on being CONVICTED however you really have to read the question and then answer honestly.

You still answer Yes if you have had a conviction.