ATIP · Aug 21, 2026

How to request your IRCC file and GCMS notes

Already have the notes? Start with how to read them → How to read GCMS notes.

If you are eligible to make an Access to Information Act request, I would pay the $5 and use it as the primary route for your own IRCC file. The Privacy Act is free and available regardless of where you are located, and I would usually file that request too. The official rules do not say the Access Act route is faster. This is my practical preference because the OIC delay process is clearer and, in my experience, a complaint can get a late request moving more quickly.

Both requests are commonly called ATIP. That shorthand hides a choice that matters because the eligibility rules, fees and complaint processes are different.

My practical recommendation is straightforward:

If you are eligible, file the Access Act request as the primary request for your own IRCC records.
File the free Privacy Act request in parallel as an additional route.
If you are outside Canada and cannot make an Access Act request directly, use the Privacy Act or an eligible requester in Canada with the required consent.
Request policy, operational, statistical or other institutional IRCC records under the Access to Information Act.
If the response is late, identify the Act before filing a complaint. Access Act complaints and Privacy Act complaints go to different commissioners.

An information request does not pause a restoration deadline, Federal Court deadline, reconsideration deadline or any other deadline in the underlying immigration matter. Calendar those separately.

ATIP is not a third law

ATIP means access to information and privacy. Federal institutions use the term for work performed under two separate statutes:

The Access to Information Act
The Privacy Act

There is no federal law called the “Access to Information Privacy Act.” People will understand what you mean if you say you are filing an ATIP, but you need the correct Act when you submit the request and when you complain about how it was handled.

Access Act or Privacy Act: which one should you use?

Question	Access to Information Act	Privacy Act
What is it mainly for?	Existing government records, including policy, operational, statistical and corporate information	Your own personal information held by a federal institution
Who can make a direct request?	A Canadian citizen, permanent resident, or individual or corporation present in Canada	Canadian citizens, permanent residents and foreign nationals, regardless of location
Application fee	$5	Free
Common IRCC use	Personal IRCC records when the requester is eligible, records requested through an eligible requester with consent, and records about IRCC itself	Your own GCMS notes, application documents, correspondence and case information
Complaint body	Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada	Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada

IRCC confirms the eligibility and fee rules on its current Access to Information Act and Privacy Act request pages (canada.ca IRCC ATIP).

If you want your own immigration file

The free answer is the Privacy Act. My practical answer is different. If you are eligible to make an Access Act request, I would pay the $5 and file it. I would generally file a Privacy Act request at the same time because it is free.

Parallel requests do not mean unlimited duplicates

One focused Access Act request and one Privacy Act request. See 2025 OIC 63. Do not resubmit identical Access Act requests.

If you want information about IRCC

Use the Access to Information Act for existing institutional records.

What can you request from your immigration file?

GCMS and case-processing notes, officer decision notes, forms, supporting documents, correspondence, PFLs, webforms, case-history, defined date range.

Suggested wording:

Please provide the records in IRCC’s client file relating to application [APPLICATION NUMBER] for the period [START DATE] to [END DATE], including GCMS and case-processing notes, copies of application forms and supporting documents, and incoming and outgoing correspondence, including webform submissions located and associated with the file.

Why applicants should keep their own IRCC record

The obvious reason is a refusal. A refusal letter may give you the conclusion without showing the complete processing history. GCMS and officer notes can help you compare the decision with the application that was actually before the officer.

The broader reason is consistency. Immigration forms repeatedly ask about work, education, addresses, travel, family relationships, refusals and status history. If you cannot access an earlier application, you may be reconstructing years of dates and answers from memory.

That creates avoidable discrepancies. The answer is not to repeat an earlier answer blindly. If the earlier application was wrong, correct the new answer and explain the difference. The value of the old application is that it tells you what was previously declared, so you can deal with the discrepancy deliberately rather than discovering it after an officer raises it.

The correspondence matters too. Applicants send webforms, receive messages through different accounts and sometimes have no clear view of what was associated with the file. Requesting the correspondence can help rebuild that history.

The absence of a webform or document from a disclosure package does not conclusively prove that IRCC never received it. It tells you that the document was not located and released in response to that request. That may still be important, but it is not the same conclusion.

GCMS notes are not live application tracking

When an application sits for months without a useful update, requesting the file can be more informative than repeatedly calling a contact centre that cannot show you the entire record.

Still, GCMS notes are a snapshot of the records located and processed for disclosure. They do not update continuously, and filing the request does not accelerate the immigration application. An ATIP complaint addresses the information request, not the processing speed of the underlying immigration file.

My view is that applicants should request their records more often, but they should not confuse access to the file with a remedy for every delay.

Save the request before you submit it

This is the part people skip, then regret when the deadline passes.

Save:

A PDF or screenshot of the complete submitted request
The exact wording used
The submission date
The institution’s receipt or confirmation date
The request or tracking number
The $5 receipt, if applicable
The confirmation email
Any transfer notice
Any extension notice
All later correspondence and responses

The secure ATIP Online account can show requests, status changes, messages and downloadable results. Use it. It is still not a live, complete view of the underlying immigration file, and the confirmation email or payment receipt is not a substitute for saving what you actually requested.

You should not have to spend half an hour searching your inbox for a receipt number that is difficult to connect to a particular request. Saving the record at the beginning avoids that problem.

The 30-day response period

The ordinary statutory response period is 30 calendar days. For an Access to Information Act request, the period begins the day after the institution receives it.

The institution may transfer the request or extend the response period in circumstances permitted by the Act. Privacy Act requests also begin with a 30-day response period and can be extended in specified circumstances.

An acknowledgement is not the final response. An extension notice is also not a completed response, but a valid extension may change the date on which a no-response complaint becomes available.

That is why the calculation is not always “I clicked Submit 31 days ago.” Start with the institution’s receipt date, then account for any transfer, extension, partial release or final response.

IRCC’s own numbers show a real delay problem

I do not think it is accurate to say IRCC misses the 30-day period in most cases. Its 2024-2025 reports say 71.5% of Access Act requests and 75.4% of Privacy Act requests were completed within 30 days.

2024-2025 closed requests	Access to Information Act	Privacy Act
Closed within 30 days	127,668 of 178,668 (71.5%)	74,154 of 98,367 (75.4%)
Closed within legislated timelines	80.7%	87.0%
Took more than 365 days	21,406 (12.0%)	4,297 (4.4%)
Active beyond timelines on 31 Mar 2025	27,496	11,293

Even on that measure, 19.3% of closed IRCC Access Act requests and 13% of closed Privacy Act requests were outside the applicable legislated timelines. IRCC also reported that 21,406 Access Act requests took more than a year to close.

If an Access Act request is late

Complaints go to the Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada (OIC). 60-day window typically begins the day after the response should have arrived. Day 31 for a standard request with no valid extension. Information Commissioner cannot extend the 60-day limit.

If a Privacy Act request is late

Complaints go to the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada (OPC). First step generally try to resolve with the institution. Access Act 60-day deadline does not govern Privacy Act complaints.

Where Day 31 fits

I built Day 31 for the standard Access Act delay. Small tool. It does not decide whether an extension is valid, guarantee OIC acceptance, or accelerate the immigration application. The walk-through is How to use Day 31.

Prepare a late-request complaint

Correcting personal information

Privacy Act correction is not a substitute for updating an active immigration application.

What I would do

If I wanted my own IRCC file and I was eligible, I would make a focused Access Act request, pay the $5 and submit a Privacy Act request in parallel. I would save the complete record of both requests before closing the browser. If an Access Act request passed its applicable deadline without a response, I would prepare the complaint and file it. The government already has the file. Giving the applicant a usable copy should be the easy part.