Slapped with a 221g

[spectheintro 18]

Is this another one of those Mod warnings that, if you don't say it the way I like I will take action against you?

It's about a common atmosphere of respect and courtesy. The only thing that separates a forum like this from a community like 4-chan is our moderation. No one is saying G&A had to shower Cluster with words of praise and lavish him with compliments. His response was unnecessarily harsh. And that's a shame, because frankly, the guy gives good advice. He knows his stuff.

Let me show you. This is what he said:

You were not "slapped" with a 221g. You received a 221g because you were not prepared for the interview. Do you expect them to waive the rules for you because you are special and give you a visa anyway? Most stress in life is caused by unrealistic expectations. You unrealistically expected her to get a visa when you didn't prepare and didn't follow the rules and instructions. Big surprise.

We are aware about being "iffy" I cannot count the times I have said that if you are borderline on the financial requirements to get a co-sponsor. This is a subjective decision by the consulates, it varies by consulate, by counsulate officer and by case details. Unless you are comfortable above the guides, get a co-sponsor. YOU and only YOU can make that decision, YOU decided not to. So, thank you for your example. The financial support requirement is NOT a pass/fail test, there is NO finish line where you win. It is a subjective decision made by ONE person who does not know you or your fiancee and has about 30 seconds to review what you give him. so for others...go to an interview with borderline financials an this is what you can expect. You reap what you sow.

The other document is specific to the consulate you are using, you did not study the needs for that consulate. What do you need to do? Get a co-sponsor. Go to the regional forums and study about this other document (do a search of the forum which will give you answers for the last several years on this topic) If that doesn't get you your answer, email or call the visa section directly and ask them.

Now this is the EXACT SAME INFORMATION, except without the belittlement.

You received a 221g because the consulate wants more evidence. This is a subjective decision by the consulates, it varies by consulate, by counsulate officer and by case details. The financial support requirement is NOT a pass/fail test, there is NO finish line where you win. It is a subjective decision made by ONE person who does not know you or your fiancee and has about 30 seconds to review what you give him. In this case, he wants a co-sponsor. You're going to have to get one.

The other document is specific to the consulate you are using. Go to the regional forums and study about this other document (do a search of the forum which will give you answers for the last several years on this topic) If that doesn't get you your answer, email or call the visa section directly and ask them.

See the difference? No honey, no false pleasantry. But not insulting.

Edited November 14, 2009 by spectheintro

[Filipina Lover 1]

Not really fair since all these illegals come here and live and work and will probably never leave.

You try to do it right and they cause you problems.

I guess you will need a co-sponsor, but they really shouldn't consider kids living somewhere else as a full dependant.

I have a kid too not living with me, partially dependent, but I counted him as 1 anyway, even though it should really be 1/2 or 1/4

It's not fair, if she plans on working when she gets here, that will be enough money to live, but they don't count that at this point, only counts later. I guess you need to pray hard and ask God to grant you a miracle.

Here's an idea, don't know if it counts, but you might want to sign up with a temporary job service and then have them sign a paper saying that you work for them at a certain rate per hour, that might add on just enough money to get you to pass, and then work temporary part-time on a second job.

[luv2uallday 1]

You were not "slapped" with a 221g. You received a 221g because you were not prepared for the interview. Do you expect them to waive the rules for you because you are special and give you a visa anyway? Most stress in life is caused by unrealistic expectations. You unrealistically expected her to get a visa when you didn't prepare and didn't follow the rules and instructions. Big surprise.

We are aware about being "iffy" I cannot count the times I have said that if you are borderline on the financial requirements to get a co-sponsor. This is a subjective decision by the consulates, it varies by consulate, by counsulate officer and by case details. Unless you are comfortable above the guides, get a co-sponsor. YOU and only YOU can make that decision, YOU decided not to. So, thank you for your example. The financial support requirement is NOT a pass/fail test, there is NO finish line where you win. It is a subjective decision made by ONE person who does not know you or your fiancee and has about 30 seconds to review what you give him. so for others...go to an interview with borderline financials an this is what you can expect. You reap what you sow.

The other document is specific to the consulate you are using, you did not study the needs for that consulate. What do you need to do? Get a co-sponsor. Go to the regional forums and study about this other document (do a search of the forum which will give you answers for the last several years on this topic) If that doesn't get you your answer, email or call the visa section directly and ask them.

---------------------------------------------------END OF QUOTE---------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you for being honest and to the point with people that try to deflect their failures and failure to take responsability for their actions or INactions. And redirecting the true blame right back where it belongs. Too long people here sugar coat the truth hoping it will go down better. But in the end it just turns the truth into a lie. you are 100% right in your evaluation and hope more people will be like you when statements like these come up in the forums

a lesson to the moderators. FREE SPEACH ISN'T JUST PROMOTING IDEAS AND STATEMENTS YOU AGREE WITH BUT PROMOTING SPEACH THAT YOU DON'T AGREE WITH AS WELL. not biasly lifting one side up and opressing and censoring the other side just because you don't like what you hear and hide behind TOS. this cancer that grows in forums is what kills forums or nueters them at the least. good day. FREE SPEACH LIVES!!!!!!

Edited November 14, 2009 by luv2uallday

[Wei&Shu(Joe) 2]

Not really fair since all these illegals come here and live and work and will probably never leave.

You try to do it right and they cause you problems.

I guess you will need a co-sponsor, but they really shouldn't consider kids living somewhere else as a full dependant.

I have a kid too not living with me, partially dependent, but I counted him as 1 anyway, even though it should really be 1/2 or 1/4

It's not fair, if she plans on working when she gets here, that will be enough money to live, but they don't count that at this point, only counts later. I guess you need to pray hard and ask God to grant you a miracle.

Here's an idea, don't know if it counts, but you might want to sign up with a temporary job service and then have them sign a paper saying that you work for them at a certain rate per hour, that might add on just enough money to get you to pass, and then work temporary part-time on a second job.

The topics of legal and illegal immigration are not in any way related, other than by the word immigration. The fairness/unfairness/degree of difficulty of our legal immigration system has no connection to illegal immigration, other than the fact that some of the unfairness/difficulty of the system is an attempt to prevent illegal immigration.

When one says that the difficulty of this system is unfair SINCE there is illegal immigration going on, one is generally criticizing the government for not doing enough to stop illegal immigration...by using an example of one way the government DOES try to stop illegal immigration. One may notice that neither process (trying to stop undocumented border crossings and trying to stop fraudulent visa acquisitions) is perfect. They both involve inconvenience (and sometimes extreme inconvenience) to those legally crossing/applying and they both allow through some "immigrants" who are fraudulent/undocumented.

If one were to think deeply about the subject, the likelihood that either process will ever be perfect is astronomically small. Your statement that it is unfair SINCE there are illegal border crossings is akin to a detained illegal immigrant complaining that he or she is being treated unfairly because some fraudulent K visas are granted while he or she was stopped from entering.

IMHO, this flawed logic (that K visa difficulty is unfair due to some illegal border crossings being successful) causes a significant amount of unneeded suffering on this site. However, I also understand that some just use statements like this to insert their ideology into unrelated topics but again, IMHO, that is also off-topic/inappropriate. The first increases one's own suffering and the second is a misguided attempt to increase others' suffering.

As to the original posting, please correct me if I'm wrong but it seems that OP calculated that the embassy wouldn't include his partially supported children in the calculation of his family size. He therefore made the assumption his family size was 2 and embassy said it is 4 and that is what moved him from above to below the poverty line. I would suspect (again, correct me if I'm wrong) that embassy knew about the 2 children based on some document submitted by OP. I suspect the most likely scenario is that the 2 children are listed on his tax returns. I think it is probably highly unlikely that embassy sent out investigators to find 2 children and discover that OP was supporting them.

If my reading of the situation is correct, then it would seem OP probably submitted evidence that he already had 2 dependents but convinced himself that somehow they weren't really dependents and decided to assume he had a family size of 2 instead of 4. That seems a sticky situation because if you propose that the dependents you listed aren't "really" dependents, the IRS might have some issues with that. If that is how it went down, it would certainly seem prudent that one check, prior to assuming you could erase 2 dependents by asserting that they don't live with you full time, whether that little slight of hand was going to fly at the embassy.

Again, assuming I've read the situation correctly, the lesson of this thread may be not to make assumptions that are contradicted by the evidence you present. If you are presenting tax returns that show 2 current dependents then adding your wife will make for a family size of 4 even if you can argue that current dependents are not fully dependent. For a family size of 2, your wife would need to be the only person who will meet the definition of a dependent.

If I misread the post or made incorrect assumptions, I apologize to the OP.

[Susita 175]

I don't know what most don't get about this:

you don't have to treat people like ####### to get your point across. What's so hard to get about that?

Pushbrk said the same thing as Gary & Alla did, he said it directly and without sugarcoating it, but without insulting the OP. So that's all I was saying we should do in the first place.

What I think happens is that we become so used to this whole visa process that we forget that there are people who haven't gone through it before, or people who have just recently discovered visa journey after filing their petitions or having their interviews. We all know how hard this process is, so let's be considerate guys... come on.

I feel for this guy because, I too went through the Lima embassy and know that sometimes they throw you curveballs or are inconsistent in what they ask for. I feel we can give him the help he needs without the extra headache.

Now I'm going to end my post with a message from none other than Mr. Bob Marley :

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

a lesson to the moderators. FREE SPEACH ISN'T JUST PROMOTING IDEAS AND STATEMENTS YOU AGREE WITH BUT PROMOTING SPEACH THAT YOU DON'T AGREE WITH AS WELL. not biasly lifting one side up and opressing and censoring the other side just because you don't like what you hear and hide behind TOS. this cancer that grows in forums is what kills forums or nueters them at the least. good day. FREE SPEACH LIVES!!!!!!

Is graffiti "free speech"? Not if it isn't your wall!

Your right to free speech ends where it infringes on the rights of others. "Free" doesn't mean "free of cost". You have the right to say whatever you like, providing it's not libelous or slanderous, but you don't have the right to use somebody else's podium to say it. If you want to exercise your right to free speech, then lease your own server and put up your own forum or blog. If you post here, you do so with the permission of the people who run this site, and you agree to abide by their rules when doing so.

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

If my reading of the situation is correct, then it would seem OP probably submitted evidence that he already had 2 dependents but convinced himself that somehow they weren't really dependents and decided to assume he had a family size of 2 instead of 4. That seems a sticky situation because if you propose that the dependents you listed aren't "really" dependents, the IRS might have some issues with that. If that is how it went down, it would certainly seem prudent that one check, prior to assuming you could erase 2 dependents by asserting that they don't live with you full time, whether that little slight of hand was going to fly at the embassy.

Again, assuming I've read the situation correctly, the lesson of this thread may be not to make assumptions that are contradicted by the evidence you present. If you are presenting tax returns that show 2 current dependents then adding your wife will make for a family size of 4 even if you can argue that current dependents are not fully dependent. For a family size of 2, your wife would need to be the only person who will meet the definition of a dependent.

Good advice. I imagine the children were listed on the divorce decree. If not, a simple background check would reveal them. Some consulates conduct a public records check using LexisNexis, which will reveal a lot about a person, including property deeds and vehicle titles, insurance claims, criminal records, and court orders like child support.

[Cluster F 0]

We don't know, the oriinal question stayed here for 24 hours without an answer from you and then you respond to me...not the OP. It does no good for him that you come and say I give bad advice when you give none. So I have given advice, you have not. You say I am wrong...but do not offer anything "right" Good luck to the OP

about the last thing i expected was to have someone rub salt in my wounds. you haven't given any advice other than that i should look up for myself what is i need. just for future reference, in case it isn't obvious, that's worse than useless to tell someone in a help forum.

my post wasn't well written. i meant to help others who may be in the same position where on paper they look like they *should* be able to qualify but barely. my bad that i didn't know it was more subjective than pass/fail. that i didn't get a co-sponsor in the first place had to do with 1) i don't have any family or friends in a position to do this for me and, 2) i thought (wrong) that a household means people living in your, you know, HOUSE. by agreement with their mom, my kids are only minimally dependent on me financially because there is no money concerns in their upbringing. there is a box on the i-864 where you check off either fully or partially dependent and i had no way of knowing that as far as the immigration process is concerned that the distinction is ignored and any dependents you list will be considered full household members. let that help someone else if they're in that position.

i still have no idea what the movimientos migratorios is and am hoping someone other than this self-righteous person might point me in the right direction. again, on the attached paperwork it is asked for both of us. while a peruvian can go and get this document which lists when the national left/entered the country there is as far as i can tell no such document here in the u.s. beyond the passport itself. i've been to some 40 countries and my passport has stamps on every page - maybe i should scan all the pages again like i did with the i-129f?

i want to thank all the others who responded with encouragement. as for a co-sponsor, i'm now in the somewhat embarrassing position of asking this of a friend of friend but first indications are optimistic :-)

[Susita 175]

Cluster F ~ My husband says that this document will be easy for your fiancee to get (as well as inexpensive, about $19 soles or 6 dollars) , but that you will not be able to get one being that you don't have a DNI (documento nacional de identidad)... I would give the embassy a call and clarify @ [011] (51-1) 618-2000. They should be able to point you in the right direction with this. Again, we didn't need this document at our interview.

Good luck & make sure to let us all know what the embassy says!

Again, once you get them all the documentation they requested and everything looks good, you'll have the visa in a few days....

[Minya's wife 25]

Not really fair since all these illegals come here and live and work and will probably never leave.

You try to do it right and they cause you problems.

I guess you will need a co-sponsor, but they really shouldn't consider kids living somewhere else as a full dependant.

I have a kid too not living with me, partially dependent, but I counted him as 1 anyway, even though it should really be 1/2 or 1/4

It's not fair, if she plans on working when she gets here, that will be enough money to live, but they don't count that at this point, only counts later. I guess you need to pray hard and ask God to grant you a miracle.

Here's an idea, don't know if it counts, but you might want to sign up with a temporary job service and then have them sign a paper saying that you work for them at a certain rate per hour, that might add on just enough money to get you to pass, and then work temporary part-time on a second job.

What does illegal immigration have to do with the subject of this thread?

They really are correct in considering kids 'living somewhere else' as a full dependent, because they are.

K-1 visa beneficiaries are not work authorized until they receive an EAD, which at the minimum is a 90 day period. Unemployment woes being what they are, realistically the immigrant may be without a job for several more months after arrival. The consulate is quite right to ensure that the sponsoring USC has sufficient means of supporting the immigrant so there is no burden on the government to do so.

There is nothing 'unfair' in this.

[pushbrk 12,908]

We don't know, the oriinal question stayed here for 24 hours without an answer from you and then you respond to me...not the OP. It does no good for him that you come and say I give bad advice when you give none. So I have given advice, you have not. You say I am wrong...but do not offer anything "right" Good luck to the OP

about the last thing i expected was to have someone rub salt in my wounds. you haven't given any advice other than that i should look up for myself what is i need. just for future reference, in case it isn't obvious, that's worse than useless to tell someone in a help forum.

my post wasn't well written. i meant to help others who may be in the same position where on paper they look like they *should* be able to qualify but barely. my bad that i didn't know it was more subjective than pass/fail. that i didn't get a co-sponsor in the first place had to do with 1) i don't have any family or friends in a position to do this for me and, 2) i thought (wrong) that a household means people living in your, you know, HOUSE. by agreement with their mom, my kids are only minimally dependent on me financially because there is no money concerns in their upbringing. there is a box on the i-864 where you check off either fully or partially dependent and i had no way of knowing that as far as the immigration process is concerned that the distinction is ignored and any dependents you list will be considered full household members. let that help someone else if they're in that position.

i still have no idea what the movimientos migratorios is and am hoping someone other than this self-righteous person might point me in the right direction. again, on the attached paperwork it is asked for both of us. while a peruvian can go and get this document which lists when the national left/entered the country there is as far as i can tell no such document here in the u.s. beyond the passport itself. i've been to some 40 countries and my passport has stamps on every page - maybe i should scan all the pages again like i did with the i-129f?

i want to thank all the others who responded with encouragement. as for a co-sponsor, i'm now in the somewhat embarrassing position of asking this of a friend of friend but first indications are optimistic :-)

You know what you need to do now but this is a K1 visa. You're not finished with the immigration proces. You are going to be filing papers two more times. Above you say..... "i had no way of knowing that as far as the immigration process is concerned that the distinction is ignored and any dependents you list will be considered full household members." This is absolutely not true. You're still blaming others for your lack of research. All you would have had to do is ask that question here. That's your way to know. You already have an answer as to the other document.

Ask any question you want but please start taking responsibility for your own lack of preparation.

Edited November 14, 2009 by pushbrk

[Cluster F 0]

You know what you need to do now but this is a K1 visa. You're not finished with the immigration proces. You are going to be filing papers two more times. Above you say..... "i had no way of knowing that as far as the immigration process is concerned that the distinction is ignored and any dependents you list will be considered full household members." This is absolutely not true. You're still blaming others for your lack of research. All you would have had to do is ask that question here. That's your way to know. You already have an answer as to the other document.

Ask any question you want but please start taking responsibility for your own lack of preparation.

jesus christ man. have you never run into bureaucracy in your life? does your every rub with the government result in perfectly logical responses? i went by the common sense of reading the frikkin instructions on the 864 and making the calculation that i qualified based on my own income. going by the i-864 instructions please point out how it is perfectly obvious that partial dependents not living with you are regardless to be considered as full dependents in your household. if you can do that maybe i can overlook that you're sitting on that high horse of yours.

Edited November 14, 2009 by Cluster F

[Minya's wife 25]

You know what you need to do now but this is a K1 visa. You're not finished with the immigration proces. You are going to be filing papers two more times. Above you say..... "i had no way of knowing that as far as the immigration process is concerned that the distinction is ignored and any dependents you list will be considered full household members." This is absolutely not true. You're still blaming others for your lack of research. All you would have had to do is ask that question here. That's your way to know. You already have an answer as to the other document.

Ask any question you want but please start taking responsibility for your own lack of preparation.

jesus christ man. have you never run into bureaucracy in your life? does your every rub with the government result in perfectly logical responses? i went by the common sense of reading the frikkin instructions on the 864 and making the calculation that i qualified based on my own income. going by the i-864 instructions please point out how it is perfectly obvious that partial dependents not living with you are regardless to be considered as full dependents in your household. if you can do that maybe i can overlook that you're sitting on that high horse of yours.

from the I-864 instructions:

Your household size includes yourself and the following individuals, no matter where they live: any spouse, any dependent children under the age of 21,...

[Wei&Shu(Joe) 2]

You know what you need to do now but this is a K1 visa. You're not finished with the immigration proces. You are going to be filing papers two more times. Above you say..... "i had no way of knowing that as far as the immigration process is concerned that the distinction is ignored and any dependents you list will be considered full household members." This is absolutely not true. You're still blaming others for your lack of research. All you would have had to do is ask that question here. That's your way to know. You already have an answer as to the other document.

Ask any question you want but please start taking responsibility for your own lack of preparation.

jesus christ man. have you never run into bureaucracy in your life? does your every rub with the government result in perfectly logical responses? i went by the common sense of reading the frikkin instructions on the 864 and making the calculation that i qualified based on my own income. going by the i-864 instructions please point out how it is perfectly obvious that partial dependents not living with you are regardless to be considered as full dependents in your household. if you can do that maybe i can overlook that you're sitting on that high horse of yours.

From I-864 instructions (emphasis added):

How Do I Count My Household Size?

Your household size includes yourself and the following individuals, no matter where they live: any spouse, any dependent children under the age of 21, any other dependents listed on your most recent Federal income tax return, all persons being sponsored in this affidavit of support, and any immigrants previously sponsored with a Form I-864 or Form I-864 EZ affidavit of support whom you are still obligated to support. If necessary to meet the income requirements to be a sponsor, you may include additional relatives (adult children,parents, or siblings) as part of your household size as long asthey have the same principle residence as you and promise touse their income and resources in support of the intending immigrant(s).

I don't mean to rub salt in any wounds but since you asked for it to be pointed out, I think that the phrase "no matter where they live" in the I-864 instructions probably would have settled any questions you had.

[Cluster F 0]

From I-864 instructions (emphasis added):

How Do I Count My Household Size?

Your household size includes yourself and the following individuals, no matter where they live: any spouse, any dependent children under the age of 21, any other dependents listed on your most recent Federal income tax return, all persons being sponsored in this affidavit of support, and any immigrants previously sponsored with a Form I-864 or Form I-864 EZ affidavit of support whom you are still obligated to support. If necessary to meet the income requirements to be a sponsor, you may include additional relatives (adult children,parents, or siblings) as part of your household size as long asthey have the same principle residence as you and promise touse their income and resources in support of the intending immigrant(s).

I don't mean to rub salt in any wounds but since you asked for it to be pointed out, I think that the phrase "no matter where they live" in the I-864 instructions probably would have settled any questions you had.

ok you win. touche for a good comeback! however, there is still the sticky question of how partial versus fully dependent is considered. for a three-member household i qualify on the 125% but not on four. it wasn't a gamble on my end, without lack of how this breakdown is considered i just figured that a partial dependent was equal to 50% support thereby giving me a three person household. true, i effed up on making the most plausible assumption. the fact that on my 1040 my kids are listed as dependents but without me claiming them as exemptions should have settled this but, in the end, it's obvious now that this is not the case. the bottom line is that the whole partial versus full dependency is immaterial insofar as uscis is concerned. they'll all get lumped in. and that is NOT explained in any of these forms.

Edited November 14, 2009 by Cluster F