I asked Cheryl to share her story, as I thought it is important for others to see her claim to have relinquished US citizenship despite having dual citizenship (USA/Canada) at birth. It may be very helpful to others in a similar situation.
Cheryl’s Citizenship Story
I was born in the U.S. to Canadian parents although I didn’t know that for many years. I was the only member of my family born in the United States; all my grandparents, aunts, uncles and cousins were born and living in Canada. In fact my family connections in Canada go back to well before confederation, and I am related to two Fathers of Confederation.
As a child I had deep connections to Canada, spending 3 months every summer, from the age of one visiting family and spending time at the family wilderness cabin in Ontario.
I decided when I was 17 that I wanted to move to Canada, live in Canada for the rest of my life, and become a Canadian citizen if possible.
I moved to Canada at the age of 18 on a student VISA and then became a landed immigrant on my way to becoming a citizen of Canada. I subsequently found out that my parents were Canadian citizens at my birth and that I might become a Canadian Citizen by applying as an adult to be registered as a Canadian Citizen Born Abroad. Being a Canadian by birth was particularly appealing to me. The Canadian Government allowed my registration retroactively.
Both at the time of my application for landed immigrant status and discussions about becoming a Canadian citizen by birth, Canadian Immigration officials warned me that if I became a Canadian citizen by either path I would lose my American citizenship. I believed them and as I wanted to be a Canadian citizen only and no longer an American citizen, I proceeded in both instances on the path to becoming a Canadian citizen. I did not want to be a dual citizen U.S./Canada. I could not imagine owing allegiance to two nations with different laws, policies and priorities. It seemed quite possible that a conflict might occur between the two allegiances making it impossible to honour both.
There are four important issues that have bearing on my case:
1. My parents did not register my birth with the Canadian Government and as a result, I had to apply as an adult to become a Canadian Citizen at birth. The fact that I applied as an adult, demonstrates my voluntary intent to become a Canadian citizen. I was therefore acknowledged as a dual national at birth of the United States and Canada.
2. As previously mentioned, at the time of my registration as a Canadian Citizen Born Abroad I was warned by immigration officials that I would lose my United States citizenship as a consequence. I believe this warning was based on Section 350 of the 1952 United States Immigration and Nationality Act which was the law at that time. By proceeding, I clearly demonstrated my voluntary intent to lose my US citizenship.
The 1952 INA Sec. 350 stated that a person who acquired at birth the nationality of the United States and of a foreign state and who has voluntarily sought or claimed benefits of the nationality of any foreign state shall lose his United States nationality by hereafter having a continuous residence for three years in the foreign state of which he is a national by birth at any time after attaining the age of twenty-two years. Exceptions (1) and (2) do not apply to me and restrictions on expatriation Sec.351 (a) and (b) also do not apply to me.
I believe I have met all requirements of this law for loss of nationality:
Firstly, I was a dual national by birth.
Secondly, I voluntarily sought and received many benefits from Canada. For example, I received universal health care coverage, voted in a municipal and provincial election and was accepted in a post graduate program requiring Canadian citizenship.
Finally, I also met the continuous residency requirement by living in Canada for the mandatory 3 years after age 22.
3. Section 350 was repealed (Pub. L. 95-432) on Oct. 10, 1978 after my required residency in Canada for loss of citizenship was completed and thus I believe the law as originally stated applies to my case.
4. In my research of United States Laws regarding Loss of Citizenship, I have reviewed several United States Supreme Court decisions [Perez v Brownell (1958), Trop v Dulles (1958), Afroyim v Rusk (1967) and Vance v Terrazas (1980)]. Although not all aspects of these cases apply to me I found several directives important to my case:
A. The court in several decisions stressed the importance that a Loss of Nationality must be done with the assent of the citizen. As an example in Vance v Terraskas the court concluded “In the last analysis, expatriation depends on the will of the citizen rather than on the will of Congress and its assessment of his conduct.”
B. The court also noted that a person’s intent to relinquish U.S. citizenship could be discerned not only from the person’s words but as a fair inference from proven conduct.
C. And finally, in Vance v Terraskas, the court upheld constitutionally that the standard burden of proof for evidence of loss of nationality is “clear and convincing evidence.” Proof beyond a shadow of a doubt is not required.
As such, when my Canadian Citizenship was acknowledged, my intent was to lose my United States citizenship voluntarily and I have clearly demonstrated that was my intent by my subsequent actions as listed below:
i. I have never lived in the United States since I was 17; living in Canada for the last 43 years and marrying a Canadian.
ii. I have never worked in the United States. I have only ever worked in Canada.
iii. I have never voted in a U.S. election but since being acknowledged as a Canadian citizen I have voted in all municipal, provincial and federal elections in Canada.
iv. I have never filed U.S. income tax returns but have filed annual income tax returns in Canada since 1974.
v. Once I was accepted as Canadian, I never renewed my United States passport; subsequently travelling exclusively on a Canadian passport even when entering and leaving the United States. My Canadian passport was accepted by U.S. officials thus acknowledging my Canadian only status as the U.S. law at that time required U.S. citizens travelling to and from the United States to use a U.S. passport. My passports clearly stated I was born in the United States.
vi. After acknowledgement of my Canadian citizenship, I had little connection with the United States. I visited family in the United States only a few times as my parents lived overseas for much of this time and then retired back to Canada in 1986. I also travelled to the United States for approximately 10 holidays between 1977 and 2004 (no holiday longer than 3 weeks).
vii. The last United States stamp in my passport was on Dec. 27, 2003 in Miami.
viii. I last visited the United States I believe in 2004.
ix. I never owned property in the United States.
I believe all of these actions together clearly support that my desire was to lose my United States citizenship and to live as a Canadian citizen.
5. I understand that on Feb. 6, 1994 the requirements for relinquishment of United States citizenship was changed (USC 26 section 887) such that to be valid the relinquishing act must be reported to the United States State Department but as my relinquishment occurred many years prior to 1994, I believe that I was not required to notify the State Department.
In summary, I made intentional, voluntary acts to become a Canadian citizen and lose my United States citizenship from age 18 to 25. I have acted as a Canadian citizen not a dual citizen since that time. I performed these actions in good faith and according to United States law at the time. If the law had mandated I would remain a dual citizen, I would have taken the necessary steps to renounce my United States citizenship at that time.
Cheryl’s experience at the Calgary Consulate
I first dealt with the Calgary Consullate in the Spring of 2014. They were very prompt in answering my emails and quite helpful in outlining my next steps in applying for relinquishment etc. I booked an appointment and sent in my 1st DS4079 which the consul assisstant then informed me that it likely would not be approved. In retrospect, I believe that she was correct.
At that point I kept my appointment and decided to just renounce. That did not sit well with me so I started digging without much luck until I found the Brock site. I applied for the Citizenship and Immigration file from Canada and found s.350 which seemed to completely fit my case. I ended up cancelling my appointment in June in Calgary as my file from Canada had not arrived. The consulate was very understanding and after my file arrived they made me a second appointment quite quickly.
At my appointment in Aug, the staff was pleasant but as I mentioned to you didn’t seem to understand the law i.e. adding a 4th criteria that doesn’t seem to exist and were not very helpful in helping me to understand what “benefits” of citizenship are. She tried to persuade me to renounce not relinquish as the cost was going up a lot in the near future. I can only speculate as to the reasons for this. Due to her lack of understanding of the law in this situation it certainly might have been an effort to decrease relinquishment but I do not know that for a fact at all.
The consul himself seemed too just regurgitate what the staffer had told me. It seemed clear he had not read or didn’t understand my application. He did not have any questions about my application and did not challenge me on any other aspects of my application like whether I intended to lose my citizenship at the time etc. He would not tell me what his recommendation would be because he said he had to discuss it with lawyers. It was only after the application was sent on to the State Department (3+weeks) that they told me he recommended to reject my application but would not tell me the reasons he used. I was told I could only be informed of that after the State Department makes its decision.
I assumed at the time that this is not a common law to be used in relinquishment and understand them not being informed. My problem is them recommending rejection on seemingly such a frivolous way.
My situation is like Cheryl’s.
I found out about this horror story when I wanted to apply for my Canadian passport a couple of years ago. I realized I had no ID stating I was a Canadian. (Have never travelled – except two short trips to the States years ago). I was born in the US (to Canadian parents) and came home at 2 in 1961. My mom had told me if I wanted my American citizenship I would need to claim it at 18. No thanks.
When I began the passport application process, I found I had to apply for my Canadian Citizenship certificate. In doing so, I was told by Immigration Canada they had no record of my birth abroad being registered. Both parents are gone so can’t confirm if they did or if the government lost the record. The woman I dealt with said it was possible.
So like Cheryl, I had to apply for my citizenship at birth as an adult. I have also worked for the government of BC. I will have to prove that with an affidavit signed by a former fellow employee.
From what I have been reading here, I have relinquished – right?
Silver birch, I have the same situation, except not a doc, but a SAH mom. Except State actually told me I was not a U.S. citizen at 25. The way I see it, you have a few options:
1. Be a good little American, renounce, comply with everything, and let the U.S. financially rape you and you family.
2. Renounce, give banks and advisors your CLN, and never go to the U.S. again. This means going though hoops other than renunciation is unnecessary.
3. Do nothing other than move accounts to non-reporting credit unions, and hope for the best with the Charter challenge (perhaps donate to it), and the UN human rights complaint.
If you have a Canadian account that advises you to enter the U.S. system, I’d find a new accountant.
Don’t feel bad about Citizenship and Immigration not helping you. My husband spent two nights on the phone with an assistant of Jason Kenney’s in the ministerial office. The assistant was very good about wanting to help, but that gov’t dept. can do nothing under our current citizenship laws.
@WhatamI
Worked for Cancer care ontario, and have documentation stating that it is a division of the government of ontario. I have records showing that I started work the summer of 1999. I read, somewhere here, of others in healthcare who were able to make that claim though they did have to hold their ground at the consulate. I see it as a loophole that a reasonable person would let me through, since I really have no ties to the US. But do I want to take the chance of getting an unreasonable person?
@dukeofdevon
I thought you couldn’t be a covered expat if you were born dual and live in the other country? And yes, I have found the Canadian government, and especially my own MP, John Baird (won’t even respond), uninterested in my plight. They think it is entirely reasonable for me to spend my life’s savings to comply with the demands of a foreign government. Lawyers and financial advisors are quick to give the same advice. It’s a lot to pay for something you had no choice in!
@George
“The whole problem is that homelanders, the Courts and the USG consider US Citizenship to be so precious and extremely valuable.”
Well I’m a “homelander”–eg naturalized US citizen living in the US–and I don’t necessarily consider US citizenship all that valuable to those living outside the US–except possibly to someone with very definite plans to return to the US in a short number of years and who can afford (both in terms of dollars and inconvenience) the cost of the hassles.
Of course given that I’m naturalized I grew up outside the US so I’ve certainly always been able to understand the perspective from outside the US–even before FATCA US citizenship wasn’t nearly as universally coveted as some in the US might claim it is.
@eliza
Claiming relinquishment based on the Canadian citizenship certificate is probably going to be a harder sell in your case because it is so recent. Since dual citizenship is generally allowed these days, it is harder to make the case that apply for a Cdn citizenship certificate was done with the understanding you were going to lose US citizenship. Plus if you relinquish based on the Canadian citizenship certificate the IRS might still hold you to filing returns up to the date you got the Canadian citizenship certificate.
If you took an oath upon becoming a BC gov’t employee, that is probably your better bet in terms of making a case for relinquishment–both because it presents a clearer argument in your favour and it was longer ago.
Good luck!
Silver Birch. If you were to renounce, you would be told to “contact the IRS” That means they expect you to file form 8854. Duals at birth are exempt from the net worth and the US tax liability less than 155,000 per yr. tests for covered expatriation but are not exempt from declaring that they have complied with ‘all tax obligations for the preceding 5 years’
Complying for the previous 5 yrs. would be difficult and expensive at best.
If you care to discuss this privately, ask the admins to send your e-mail to me. They have my e mail address. I’ve considered these issues at length.
@tdott: Here is the info from TD’s website: http://www.td.com/fatca/
Note the following:
Further on, TD’s website says:
TD has not yet asked me where I was born. However, I e-mailed their Customer Support via e-mail and asked if they will ask existing or new customers if they were born in the U.S. and if they will accept any documentation other than a CLN.
This was their first reply:
I wrote again and asked them to stop obfuscating (thanks Calgary411 for the word!). I advised if I did not receive a direct response, I would leave TD after 33 years. Here is their reply:
My reply was to let them know I will be leaving TD, Unfortunately, some of my assets cannot be transferred until they reach maturity in 2015 and 2016. Because these are in TFSAs and RRSPs, I hope they will be viewed by TD as non-reportable, but I do not trust TD in any way at this point.
@ Silver birch Most Canadian MPs are totally useless, I am not sure they even understand the whole situation. In any case Stephen Harper is the dictator and no one is allowed to do anything he does not approve. In their eyes we are “US Persons living in Canada:, not Canadians. It is true that they have said they will not aid a foreign government in the collection of taxes and penalties but FATCA is certainly aiding the US government in seeking us out. I am not sure that the Canadian government will resist more bully demands from the US to make us pay. Our government could have done more to protect us and chose not to. This is why we have a lawsuit.
@ eliza You are considered to be born dual at birth so applying for your Canadian citizenship as a adult really doesn’t really have any meaning. Canada passed a law retroactively to include those born abroad whose births were not registered. You might be able to explore relinquishment based on your government employment but you are required to know that you would lose the US citizenship when you accepted the employment.
@Blaze
“Yikes. I do no know how I managed to mess up all those blocked quotes, Can someone clean it up please?”
It looks pretty clear and readable to me.
@Blaze
Ah…it is very readable on my laptop…not so much on a mobile device!
@Silver Birch,
I am having trouble locating a USCIS chart which clarifies a lot of misconceptions concerning the requirements to retain USC. This would seem the first place to start. Border guards are notorious for generalizing the rules and trying to scare/force people into actions that are not helpful. When you were younger, you may have been given the wrong information in the first place.
There was a dual at one of our Info Sessions that felt she had committed an expatriating act by being some type of instructor for the Sky Cadets (not sure I have the group name correctly). I have read that if the government job is at a non-policy level, it is assumed that the intent is to retain USC. Fortunately, the woman at the meeting was advised that her position would be enough to establish an expatriating act. So there is a second area to do more research on.
@Silver Birch
The USCIS charts do not apply to your situation because they establish retention requirements for US citizens born outside the US. So far, I have found nothing to establish that one who is born on US soil must return by a certain age and so on. It appears that is only for those born outside the US who have citizenship via acquisition. This must be the reason for the wrong info you received and is no help at all. Sorry.
What sort of ties, if any, do you have with the US? Do you have any reason or desire to go there?
One thing that is often suggested to people in your situation, with considerable assets and much to lose, is to sit down and actually get at least a rough figure of what compliance would cost (filing fees plus any tax owing); what would be owed if the exit tax were assessed and so on. IOW, get some ballpark figures to help with the decision process.
@ Tricia Moon “returning by a certain age” Cheryl’s claim is based on the law (350) that existed when many of us returned to Canada from the US. It is my understanding that it required you to go to the US consulate after the age of 22 if you were born in the US and not living there at this age in order to claim your US citizenship or it was lost. There was a requirement to return to the US to live during this time or to contact the Consulate. This law was repealed in Oct 1978 so anyone turning 25 after this date retained their US citizenship regardless of where they lived.
@Tricia
I remember the Air Cadet (or was it Sea Cadet?) instructor. She was actually in the military itself, as an NCO, but that should be good enough according to the FAM etc.
Since 1986, non-policy level government work, like naturalizing, has the assumption of the individual wanting to retain USC. That’s fine, you just say that your intention was to relinquish. Prior to 1986, the assumption was always that you intended to relinquish and they took away your USC against your will. That’s what the Supreme Court put a stop to. They actually stopped doing it before 1986, but it took until then to change the laws. The same is true for the October 10, 1978 changes that dated back to Supreme Court cases from the 60’s. Still today, taking a high policy-level government job has the assumption of intending to relinquish, and one probably has to argue hard to retain USC in that case.
Your comment “one who is born on US soil must return by a certain age” sounds exactly like the repealed INA 350 that Cheryl claimed. Also, The 1952 INA 349(a)(1) originally specified a USC who naturalizes elsewhere would lose their USC if they didn’t return the to US prior to age 25. That was changed in 1986, IIRC. It even allowed for minors to naturalize and lose USC and is what Benedict Arnold Be Me tried unsuccessfully to argue even though it was clearly the law at the time. Maybe for a non-minor, arguing this old law has the same chance as arguing INA 350?
The old INA 349(a)(1):
LOSS OF NATIONALITY BY NATIVe-BORN OR NATURAlIZED CITIZEN
SEC.349. (a) From and after the effective date of this Act a person
who is a national of the United States whether by birth or naturaliza-
tion, shall lose his nationality by-
(1) obtaining naturalization in a foreign state upon his own
application, upon an application filed in his behalf by a parent,
guardian, or duly authorized agent, or through the naturalization
of a parent having legal custody of such person: Provided, That
iiatioiiality shall not be lost by any person under this section as
the result of the naturalization of a parent or parents while such
person is under the age of twenty-one years, or as the result of a
naturalization obtained on behalf of a person under twenty-one
years of age by a parent, guardian, or duly authorized agent,
unless such person shall fail to enter the United States to establish
a permanent residence prior to his twenty-fifth birthday: And
provided further. That a person who shall have lost nationality
prior to January 1, 1948, through the naturalization in a foreign
state of a parent or parents, may, within one year from the
effective date of this Act, apply for a visa and for admission to
the United States as a nonquota immigrant under the provisions
of section 101 (a) (27) (E) ; or …
I just want to make it very clear that INA 350 applied to people born dual-citizens, and the old INA 349(a)(1) applied to people born or naturalized as Americans and who later naturalized elsewhere.
@heartsick & What Am I
Good, thanks for clarifying this for me. This is the first time I have come across this situation and hope I have straight for future referencer.
I am laughing now as I remember it was indeed the Sea Cadets. It made me think of a certain dubious organization which has a similar-sounding name for a rather scary bunch of folks – the Sea Org. I thought, OMG that poor woman. First a “not”-American person with all these issues and the Sea Org on top of that!
Never a dull moment these days………….
@Ann#1, many here at IBS will think that I oft sound like a boring drum repeating the same beat.
But having just said that, I am going to change my beat on the drum ever so slightly……..
The BEST thing that can happen for yourself and your employer is for ADCS to win in Court in Canada. Your employer should clearly understand that.
If these boards have been helpful to you which I think they have, I would implore/beg you to ask your employer to look at the ADCS website, maybe have a personal call with Dr. Stephen Kish and make a corporate donation to ADCS.
I would also ask you to circulate the ADCS website with each partner at your firm and ask them for support.
I would ask you to ask your employer to ask the Canada Law Society to support ADCS.
Having said that, I firmly believe that as a sole Canadian Citizen resident in Canada who in fact voluntarily relinquished former US Citizenship under 8 US Code that you have to do N-O-T-H-I-N-G other than put a personal file together. I think after you obtain a legal opinion on same that you may wish to support ADCS for what would have been at least $2,350 US in fees to a foreign government.
I remember the old advert on Fram Oil Filters, pay me know or pay me later.
You either need to pay a foreign government or pay ADCS but someone needs to be paid.
@SilverBirch, as I said before some at IBS may think I sound like a broken record but the record player needle is moving not skipping. 😉
1.) The best thing you can do immediately is to donate to ADCS, donate now and donate often. You then need to ask other similar situated Docs to do the same for their own physical and financial health!!
Please tell me if I am wrong but this is damaging to your physical well being.
2.) On these boards I am a broken record that the truth must always be kept. IF you accepted employment with any part of the Canadian Government or subdivision thereof with the knowledge and intention you would lose your US Citizenship then you have lost your US Citizenship in 1999. This is part of 8 US Code;
—–
(4)
(A) accepting, serving in, or performing the duties of any office, post, or employment under the government of a foreign state or a political subdivision thereof, after attaining the age of eighteen years if he has or acquires the nationality of such foreign state; or
——
3.) IF you in fact performed such act then the burden is on you to document same. Pre-FATCA there was no real need to document same but now you do need records.
You need to put a file together that is equal to what you would put together for a patient!!
4.) IF a CLN was required under US Law to have relinquished then the IGA would not allow for a “reasonable explanation.” Besides there are US Congress documents which affirm a CLN is not required.
5.) You need to decide if you want to apply for a CLN. You already understand an ultravires decision could be made in denying it thereby requiring you to renounce. You need to determine the full cost of compliance in 2014/2015 both minimal best case and maximal worst case.
IF you do not have a CLN, you might be unable to transit or travel to the US.
6.) If you do not wish the US State Department to issue an opinion on your citizenship, it may be beneficial to hire a very specialized lawyer to issue you a legal opinion on your current status and when your US Citizenship was lost. You will need to give this individual your now thick file for review.
In advance of that legal opinion you may wish to swear a statutory affadavit before a notary or lawyer stating what you did, when you did it, and that you lost your US Citizenship.
7.) You will now have a thick file, a statutory affadavit with copies, a formal legal opinion. IF you continue to do business with that firm asking questions you can submit the above and see what they do. IF they reject your reasonable explanation, I am sure Joe Arvey, Esquire will be very interested at that point in adding you as a witness to the ADCS lawsuit.
Your other alternative is to find a credit union or other firm that does not ask unlawful and ultravires questions that you can truthfully answer without sinking in a pit.
8.) Conclusion? IF you are not a US Citizen then stick to your core belief!!! Do not ever waiver from that position, ever.
@Cheryl, the fact that you had a student visa to study in Canada and that you were a landed immigrant in Canada means that Canada did NOT reognize you at that time nor did you yourself recognize that you were a Canadian Citizen.
You applied to register as a Canadian Citizen some forty years ago in the mid 70’s.
Let me refer you to 7 FAM 1250, the current State Department manual on Citizenship, who knows what they applied four decades ago…..page two;
– – – – –
c. Terminology: Foreign state procedures for conferring nationality after birth may transpire under various terminology such as “naturalization,” “registration,” “declaration,” or “reintegration.” The terminology used is not determinative; the important factors are whether the person acquires the foreign nationality after birth and whether an application is made. If these factors are present, a potentially expatriating act has been performed.
d. Application for naturalization:
(1) Naturalization can be an expatriating act under INA 349(a) only if the individual affirmatively applies for naturalization;
(2) An expatriating act is not committed if a U.S. national acquires the nationality of a foreign country by automatic operation of the country’s law (e.g., by being the child of a national of that country) and did not take affirmative action to acquire the other nationality;
– – – – – – – –
IF you had received Canadian Citizenship automatically THEN and only then you would have been able to apply for a Canadian Passport immediately. That was not the case!!
You had to first apply to be registered as a Canadian Citizen and only then after being registered or “affirmatively applying” as State Departement says could you get a Canadian Passport.
Everything else you outlined is indeed fascinating and should have also applied. However, I think a parallel argument could be made that you expatriated when you applied for registration after the age of 18.
Your case is strengthened because you arrived in Canada on a student visa and later was admitted as a landed immigrant who then applied for registration after 18 and then because of that registration no longer needed the landed immigrant visa.
@Eliza “From what I have been reading here, I have relinquished – right?”
If you did it with the intention to relinquish US Citizenship then you lost it. This means you knew you were a US Citizen, you knew that US Law said it was expatriating and you did this expecting it.
From the quote of 7 US FAM 1250, I believe that registration after age 18 is an expatriating act. You would need to document it with copies of all the old files.
Your BC Emplyment is also expatriating.
Paper is essential!!!!!!!
All the other advice applies.
I would think that if you want to get a CLN, then it might also be helpful to have in advance a legal opinion and a statutory affadavit of what you did, when you did it and that you voluntarily expatriated signed by yourself before a notary or lawyer.
@George, Thank you for that thought. I will keep it in mind if my CLN is not forthcoming.
@Tricia:
*Officers* in the cadet program, ie. the adult supervisors. are actually real commissioned officers, so INA 349(3)(b) applies. The cadets *themselves* are 1) minors and 2) don’t take any form of oath.
@Cheryl, make sure you never lose that old Canadian Passport with the US entry stamp in it. In your mind that should be prima facia evidence you are not a US Citizen having entered on a non US Passport.
@George,
Well done! In the past, I’ve expressed my opinion that simply applying for a Canadian Registration of Birth Abroad was not an expatriating act, but your find in 7 FAM 1250 has changed my mind.
Now I can’t remember if anybody at IBS has actually tried making this claim. I might remember that somebody put it into an email and a consulate staffer (maybe Calgary?) said it wasn’t an expatriating act, but of course staffers and consuls have made many incorrect statements. It will be interesting to see if somebody tries this.
This may be a bit twisted, but consider this: The US considers it an expatriating act to apply for foreign citizenship registration after birth. Does it not follow then that they couldn’t possibly (legally) consider a child of a USC born abroad a USC until and unless a registration application is made for the child? I may be beating a dead horse, but if anybody ever found a definitive answer to the question of automatic citizenship, I missed it.
@silverbirch, How can a member of parliament not respond to a constituent with a significant problem. At least one of his staffers should be in contact???!!! My conservative MP was useless but at least she replied. They have forgotten who they represent.
Anyone, if my attempt at getting a CLN with section 350 does not work and I decided to use this other angle of expatriating by applying for citizenship by birth, how do I do that? Do I just have to start from scratch and a new appointment, application etc?