a useless trip?

[Roberts 0]

Hi Everyone,

Thx for all the input. Like I said in my previous post, my fiance was going to visit in April, But the travel agent told him he needed a visa because of a previous conviction. So he paid for the visa application & made the appointment which isn't until may 9th. He also paid & ordered the police report. Well, now the police report has come back clear, and it appears he doesn't need the holiday visa...we know he won't get a refund but we were wondering if his getting the holiday visa will help any at all toward the finace visa. Or if he needs to keep that appointment at all...Does any body know? it's such a long trip for him to go to London for no good reason, thats why we ask.

He's now booked his flight to visit for 2 weeks the end of June & 1st of July... So we're setting up our engagement Party for June 28, we'll take pics for our photo album.

Ya'll have a great day!

[gwenneh 7]

He doesn't need the holiday visa; receiving one won't count or help towards the fiance visa as they are given out based on entirely different criteria.

My husband applied for a tourist visa and didn't keep his appointment, no harm done.

[rebeccajo 14]

You realize that the mere fact your fiance's police report is clear does not obviate the fact that he may not be able to use the VWP?

Edited March 22, 2008 by rebeccajo

[Mark&Steph 0]

You realize that the mere fact your fiance's police report is clear does not obviate the fact that he may not be able to use the VWP?

I don't know if it was revealed when the visa appointment was booked (they did ask me what the reason I needed a visa was, so I assume it was) but I know I'd not like to take a chance of using the VWP knowing that somewhere, I might be on record as stating I have a criminal record.

[rebeccajo 14]

You realize that the mere fact your fiance's police report is clear does not obviate the fact that he may not be able to use the VWP?

I don't know if it was revealed when the visa appointment was booked (they did ask me what the reason I needed a visa was, so I assume it was) but I know I'd not like to take a chance of using the VWP knowing that somewhere, I might be on record as stating I have a criminal record.

It really doesn't matter whether or not one is 'on record' for stating they have a criminal record.

It's the fact that one does.

[Mark&Steph 0]

It really doesn't matter whether or not one is 'on record' for stating they have a criminal record.

It's the fact that one does.

My point was they could/would have to lie on the I94 to use the VWP, and they would have the clean record to prove it... But if it's on record, they might get caught in the lie and cause big problems later.

I'm not advocating lying btw

[rebeccajo 14]

It really doesn't matter whether or not one is 'on record' for stating they have a criminal record.

It's the fact that one does.

My point was they could/would have to lie on the I94 to use the VWP, and they would have the clean record to prove it... But if it's on record, they might get caught in the lie and cause big problems later.

I'm not advocating lying btw

I didn't think you were.

But my point is that US immigration law does not recognize 'spent crimes'. So even if there were an offense not showing on a report, it needs to be declared whenever filing for a visa.

Misprepresentation is a bigger offense to US immigration law than many other crimes. There are 'exceptions' for some youthful offenses; there is the waiver process for others; there is deportation for misprepresentation. Even after the grant of a benefit.

[Mark&Steph 0]

I didn't think you were.

But my point is that US immigration law does not recognize 'spent crimes'. So even if there were an offense not showing on a report, it needs to be declared whenever filing for a visa.

Misprepresentation is a bigger offense to US immigration law than many other crimes. There are 'exceptions' for some youthful offenses; there is the waiver process for others; there is deportation for misprepresentation. Even after the grant of a benefit.

The form I got from subject access disclosed spent convictions as well. Which would make sense as spent convictions are not discounted.

I don't understand why it's not shown on the new forms.

I think we're both on the same side or the argument, just approaching it from different angles. When it comes time to apply for the K1 visa and declare the conviction, if they'd used the VWP and (possibly) lied about having a conviction (involving moral terpitude) it could possibly screw up the case.

[rebeccajo 14]

I didn't think you were.

But my point is that US immigration law does not recognize 'spent crimes'. So even if there were an offense not showing on a report, it needs to be declared whenever filing for a visa.

Misprepresentation is a bigger offense to US immigration law than many other crimes. There are 'exceptions' for some youthful offenses; there is the waiver process for others; there is deportation for misprepresentation. Even after the grant of a benefit.

The form I got from subject access disclosed spent convictions as well. Which would make sense as spent convictions are not discounted.

I don't understand why it's not shown on the new forms.

I think we're both on the same side or the argument, just approaching it from different angles. When it comes time to apply for the K1 visa and declare the conviction, if they'd used the VWP and (possibly) lied about having a conviction (involving moral terpitude) it could possibly screw up the case.

The angle I was at is this - it's too big of an issue to pretend the incidents didn't happen just because they don't appear on a report.

Most folks don't realize just how big misrepresentation is in the immigration picture. Greencards can be revoked.

[Mark&Steph 0]

The angle I was at is this - it's too big of an issue to pretend the incidents didn't happen just because they don't appear on a report.

Most folks don't realize just how big misrepresentation is in the immigration picture. Greencards can be revoked.

Yeah, that's pretty much my angle too. Someone with a clean record showing (even though there is a conviction) could get away with (not legitimately) using the VWP for a vacation... but as someone who is hoping to emigrate it's really not worth trying for the reasons you stated.

My earlier posts just wasn't worded well.

[rebeccajo 14]

I've even known of people to travel on the VWP when they have convictions that show.

If you travel on the VWP you don't need to order a police report to do so. So let's say you know you had a past conviction, but it's for a 'spent' crime. In your mind, it's over and done with.

So then you decide to immigrate and order a police report. Voila - you discover your 'spent' crime is now an issue.

I've read of reprimands during interviews for this type of thing. And I've read of denials.

[Mark&Steph 0]

I've even known of people to travel on the VWP when they have convictions that show.

If you travel on the VWP you don't need to order a police report to do so. So let's say you know you had a past conviction, but it's for a 'spent' crime. In your mind, it's over and done with.

So then you decide to immigrate and order a police report. Voila - you discover your 'spent' crime is now an issue.

I've read of reprimands during interviews for this type of thing. And I've read of denials.

So the long and short of it is it's better to go to the embassy and apply for the B1/B2 visa than have to worry about it more at a later date.

I can easily understand why there would be denials. The spent conviction could be one of "moral terpitude" which is the big no-no where visas are concerned.

[rebeccajo 14]

I've even known of people to travel on the VWP when they have convictions that show.

If you travel on the VWP you don't need to order a police report to do so. So let's say you know you had a past conviction, but it's for a 'spent' crime. In your mind, it's over and done with.

So then you decide to immigrate and order a police report. Voila - you discover your 'spent' crime is now an issue.

I've read of reprimands during interviews for this type of thing. And I've read of denials.

So the long and short of it is it's better to go to the embassy and apply for the B1/B2 visa than have to worry about it more at a later date.

I can easily understand why there would be denials. The spent conviction could be one of "moral terpitude" which is the big no-no where visas are concerned.

I don't know if you would need to actually apply for a visitors visa to find out if you need one. But contacting the consulate would definitely be in order.

[Mark&Steph 0]

I don't know if you would need to actually apply for a visitors visa to find out if you need one. But contacting the consulate would definitely be in order.

Maybe they'll be able to give out the information, but the London Embassy site actually says if you are not sure if you are eligible, apply for the visa.

http://london.usembassy.gov/cons_new/visa/...wizard008a.html

I'd definitely contact them (at the very least) before using VWP

Edited March 22, 2008 by Mark&Steph

[rebeccajo 14]

I don't know if you would need to actually apply for a visitors visa to find out if you need one. But contacting the consulate would definitely be in order.

Maybe they'll be able to give out the information, but the London Embassy site actually says if you are not sure if you are eligible, apply for the visa.

http://london.usembassy.gov/cons_new/visa/...wizard008a.html

I'd definitely contact them (at the very least) before using VWP

Ah. Very good.

Great job on doing the research!