PLEASE HELP US! K-1 QUESTIONS

[pushbrk 12,824]

Do I need to re-post my reply again? Seriously people. I did it. It worked and it never came back to bite us on the #######. I know other UK DCF people who did exactly the same thing and they had no problem. My childhood best friend (not on VJ) did the same thing with her French husband -- they got married in CT, went back to Paris and lived there for three years and then returned.

We have had black letter law quoted here. We have had experience from a filer from the OP's own country doing the same exact thing. Clearly these pale into insignificance in the face of your opinion. When the OP does go to the interview, they may be asked where they were married but come on. We are dealing with London here and they are not exactly known for the third degree. My husband was asked three questions -- where did you meet, where will you live, what will you do for work? When we were handing our paperwork over they did remark that we were married in Vermont, but that was to the effect of "Oooooh, Vermont in December? Was it really cold?"

I don't know where all this animosity is coming from. Is it some anger at the very fact that DCF exists and some of us are lucky enough to be able to be together through the whole process? I'm sorry if that's the case, but sometimes you find love while you're living in another country. My husband and I were living together for a year before we got married, and we only got married because we wanted to keep living together but doing so in the US, not the UK. I wanted to have my friends and family at the reception, so getting married in the US was the only option and, most importantly, it was a perfectly legal option. We knew we couldn't stay in the US and adjust, so we went back to the UK and filed. 5 months later we were done.

I try not to get involved in many VJ debates, and I try not to offer advice when it's something I'm not sure about or upon which I can merely conjecture, preferring to share when I can offer my own experience. This is my story: we did it. Finis.

Most of the debate and conjecture has been about the advice to give a general truthful answer instead of "marriage" as the purpose of the visit and some about whether failing to mention that marriage was an item on the visit agenda would bite you afterward. There certainly may be some animus over some couples avoiding living separately during the immigration process but the main points of contention are not whether marrying and leaving is legal but about how to answer purpose of visit questions.

Do you recall what you gave as a reason for your marriage visit?

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

My husband-to-be said he and his mum (who was by his side) were visiting his partner's family. They asked where I was, he told them I was probably in baggage reclaim. They asked where I lived, he said in London with him and that we would all be returning (including his mum) in a month's time. They asked to see their return tickets, and that was it.

[pushbrk 12,824]

My husband-to-be said he and his mum (who was by his side) were visiting his partner's family. They asked where I was, he told them I was probably in baggage reclaim. They asked where I lived, he said in London with him and that we would all be returning (including his mum) in a month's time. They asked to see their return tickets, and that was it.

Thanks. Now that I read it, I know you already posted it in this thread. And you married this lying b.... (just kidding) Gotta have a little levity to break the mood sometimes.

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

Well he is a lying liar, but he's MY lying liar!

[mox 298]

Thanks. Now that I read it, I know you already posted it in this thread. And you married this lying b.... (just kidding) Gotta have a little levity to break the mood sometimes.

Pushbrk...you made a funny. Your reputation will suffer now, of course.

[English Muffin 59]

Well he is a lying liar, but he's MY lying liar!

I just hope and your husband can live with yourselves Maven. You obviously don't have as much integrity as other people who post on here.

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

Well he is a lying liar, but he's MY lying liar!

I just hope and your husband can live with yourselves Maven. You obviously don't have as much integrity as other people who post on here.

We are living in amoral bliss here in Burbank.

[rebeccajo 14]

Jeez.

Ok - the OP needs to do a lot more research before she moves forward. And that research has nothing to do with how her British Soldier should enter the US. (For what it's worth, I think any British serviceman in uniform with some evidence of his next duty station would have no trouble being admitted for his wedding to a US Citizen.)

I think it'd be a good idea for the OP to find out just how the British government will feel about someone who is not a British Citizen living on a British military base. It may be no problem whatsoever. But......

As was casually mentioned in a couple of places, no alien can marry a British citizen on British soil without either a fiancee visa or a spousal visa. (This is a fairly recent development in the law btw and has nothing to do with any ancient principles).

Even after they enter, aliens must obtain 'leave to remain' in the UK.

I imagine the fact that this gentleman is serving in Her Majesty's service affords him some advantages, but I would like the OP to research and discover what if any requirements there may be of her to live on base with her husband. She may find there are none - she may find the requirements are not unlike that of any alien wishing to live in the UK.

And for the record I would like to add that obtaining a K1 to enter the US, marry and return to the 'homeland' is not unnecessary (as has been stated). Not everybody can use the VWP. Not everybody can get a tourist visa. There is nothing written into the K1 that says it is 'designed' for those who intend to adjust status. Adjusting status is an advantage to K1 entrants, not a requirement. it's not an expectation of the US government that adjustment be accomplished.

[pushbrk 12,824]

Jeez.

Ok - the OP needs to do a lot more research before she moves forward. And that research has nothing to do with how her British Soldier should enter the US. (For what it's worth, I think any British serviceman in uniform with some evidence of his next duty station would have no trouble being admitted for his wedding to a US Citizen.)

I think it'd be a good idea for the OP to find out just how the British government will feel about someone who is not a British Citizen living on a British military base. It may be no problem whatsoever. But......

As was casually mentioned in a couple of places, no alien can marry a British citizen on British soil without either a fiancee visa or a spousal visa. (This is a fairly recent development in the law btw and has nothing to do with any ancient principles).

Even after they enter, aliens must obtain 'leave to remain' in the UK.

I imagine the fact that this gentleman is serving in Her Majesty's service affords him some advantages, but I would like the OP to research and discover what if any requirements there may be of her to live on base with her husband. She may find there are none - she may find the requirements are not unlike that of any alien wishing to live in the UK.

And for the record I would like to add that obtaining a K1 to enter the US, marry and return to the 'homeland' is not unnecessary (as has been stated). Not everybody can use the VWP. Not everybody can get a tourist visa. There is nothing written into the K1 that says it is 'designed' for those who intend to adjust status. Adjusting status is an advantage to K1 entrants, not a requirement. it's not an expectation of the US government that adjustment be accomplished.

There may well be issue to deal with on the UK side for the USC then spouse but those are not US immigration issues.

A K1 visa is unnecessary for marraige and return to homeland, for anybody who has other legal means for entering the US. After all, that's the context of this thread's discussion. I expect it's rare that people go through the K1 process with no immediate immigrant intent but sure, it's possible. Earlier today in another thread, somebody posted who had done just that but apparently didn't actually realize that's what they were doing at the time.

[rebeccajo 14]

Jeez.

Ok - the OP needs to do a lot more research before she moves forward. And that research has nothing to do with how her British Soldier should enter the US. (For what it's worth, I think any British serviceman in uniform with some evidence of his next duty station would have no trouble being admitted for his wedding to a US Citizen.)

I think it'd be a good idea for the OP to find out just how the British government will feel about someone who is not a British Citizen living on a British military base. It may be no problem whatsoever. But......

As was casually mentioned in a couple of places, no alien can marry a British citizen on British soil without either a fiancee visa or a spousal visa. (This is a fairly recent development in the law btw and has nothing to do with any ancient principles).

Even after they enter, aliens must obtain 'leave to remain' in the UK.

I imagine the fact that this gentleman is serving in Her Majesty's service affords him some advantages, but I would like the OP to research and discover what if any requirements there may be of her to live on base with her husband. She may find there are none - she may find the requirements are not unlike that of any alien wishing to live in the UK.

And for the record I would like to add that obtaining a K1 to enter the US, marry and return to the 'homeland' is not unnecessary (as has been stated). Not everybody can use the VWP. Not everybody can get a tourist visa. There is nothing written into the K1 that says it is 'designed' for those who intend to adjust status. Adjusting status is an advantage to K1 entrants, not a requirement. it's not an expectation of the US government that adjustment be accomplished.

There may well be issue to deal with on the UK side for the USC then spouse but those are not US immigration issues.

A K1 visa is unnecessary for marraige and return to homeland, for anybody who has other legal means for entering the US. After all, that's the context of this thread's discussion. I expect it's rare that people go through the K1 process with no immediate immigrant intent but sure, it's possible. Earlier today in another thread, somebody posted who had done just that but apparently didn't actually realize that's what they were doing at the time.

Well, the "UK" side of things indeed has nothing to do with US immigration law. But I'd feel derelict in my 'duty' around here if I didn't mention something that's pertinent to the happy life of the couple.

And 'intent' in the context it matters is intent at the border on last entry. This gentlemen has no intent on this proposed entry. Indeed, I contend he hasn't any discernible intent at all. He and his American fiancee have a long-range plan that could change.

Honestly is always the best policy at the border. I see no reason for this gentleman to be denied if he told the WHOLE truth. It's a perfect example of every case being different.

Edited February 3, 2009 by rebeccajo

[pushbrk 12,824]

Honestly is always the best policy at the border. I see no reason for this gentleman to be denied if he told the WHOLE truth. It's a perfect example of every case being different.

I don't either but it isn't necessary, just the same.

[rebeccajo 14]

Honestly is always the best policy at the border. I see no reason for this gentleman to be denied if he told the WHOLE truth. It's a perfect example of every case being different.

I don't either but it isn't necessary, just the same.

So if it's not necessary to be anything less than forthcoming, why not be forthcoming?

See - here's my point.

There's been a whole lot of arguing here about who is right and who is wrong when talking about 'honesty'. Some of the discussion comes from what's 'right' or 'wrong' for VJ.

I don't think it matters who is 'right' or 'wrong' on that count. I think what matters is a thorough consideration of what is likely for this couple, and what obstacles they may or may not face. If there are no obstacles, let's not have a debate over them.

Every case is different. 'Vanilla' advice is - well - just silly.

[pushbrk 12,824]

Honestly is always the best policy at the border. I see no reason for this gentleman to be denied if he told the WHOLE truth. It's a perfect example of every case being different.

I don't either but it isn't necessary, just the same.

So if it's not necessary to be anything less than forthcoming, why not be forthcoming?

See - here's my point.

There's been a whole lot of arguing here about who is right and who is wrong when talking about 'honesty'. Some of the discussion comes from what's 'right' or 'wrong' for VJ.

I don't think it matters who is 'right' or 'wrong' on that count. I think what matters is a thorough consideration of what is likely for this couple, and what obstacles they may or may not face. If there are no obstacles, let's not have a debate over them.

Every case is different. 'Vanilla' advice is - well - just silly.

Opinions vary. I think it's not necessary to open yourself to additional questions when simple honest answers will get you waived through in a couple seconds, particularly if traveling in uniform. The choice is his and that's been covered many times over already.

What matters seems to be determined by each poster based on their own judgment without regard for yours or mine.

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

As the OP has pretty clearly outlined in their orginal post, a K-1 is not even an option since she doesn't know when he will be deployed. It doesn't matter if he enters on VWP or a K-1 if he has to turn around and leave 2 weeks after the wedding.

[rebeccajo 14]

As the OP has pretty clearly outlined in their orginal post, a K-1 is not even an option since she doesn't know when he will be deployed. It doesn't matter if he enters on VWP or a K-1 if he has to turn around and leave 2 weeks after the wedding.

No intent to immigrate.

IMO - no reason to worry about 'additional questions' at the border. Because the 'truth' that CBP is interested in - is clear.