Montreal denied!!!

[Wyatt's Torch 45]

I'm probably going to sound like the biggest VJ jerk by saying this, but I actually kind of understand where the CO is coming from. It seems unfair, and it IS unfair in a way...but when you look at it from the CO's standpoint, the Canadian permanent residency card, combined with the lack of employment in the U.S. shows that you're really not committed to being an American resident. When you're not actively living in a house you own there, it ISN'T a residence...it's just a house that, for all he knows, you could be renting out and be including the utility bills etc. in the rent.

That isn't to say that I side with the CO, given that WE on VJ know that your intentions are sound. But from a purely factual standpoint, there's not a lot of proof that you are a de facto American, and not a Canadian resident, merely seeking a convenient future option from your husband.

Take no offense by this...I'm just trying to see it from the CO's perspective.

[lgg 2]

AW... i'm sorry Dalene... that's a huge bummer. But it at least sounds like it's all fixable. I am sorry though that you have to go through a touch more waiting though... IT does strike me as odd though that they'd want you to give up your Canadian PR card...

I'm sorry, just a little more time and it'll get done, right?

Chin up!

LGG

[Malrothien 6]

That was probably about it because I told him I had more, like utility bills for my house in my name, including cable tv, and property tax records, but he had already made up his mind and didn't want to see anything. I had seen on VJ that many people were getting hassled for domicile, but I felt like I was well prepared for the interview. Little did I know how difficult it actually would be. I guess part of the reason I am thinking I might get a job is that I don't want to relinquish my PR card in Canada, not because I don't have intentions to move to the U.S., but because I hate the idea of closing doors and opportunities in the future. Canada has different requirements than the U.S to maintain PR status and so I'd like to keep it if I can.

You can go ahead and get a job in the US without worrying about giving up your PR card. As long as your husband makes it down to the US within 6 months, you will be fine. (I am a PR card holder, too.)

I'm probably going to sound like the biggest VJ jerk by saying this, but I actually kind of understand where the CO is coming from. It seems unfair, and it IS unfair in a way...but when you look at it from the CO's standpoint, the Canadian permanent residency card, combined with the lack of employment in the U.S. shows that you're really not committed to being an American resident. When you're not actively living in a house you own there, it ISN'T a residence...it's just a house that, for all he knows, you could be renting out and be including the utility bills etc. in the rent.

That isn't to say that I side with the CO, given that WE on VJ know that your intentions are sound. But from a purely factual standpoint, there's not a lot of proof that you are a de facto American, and not a Canadian resident, merely seeking a convenient future option from your husband.

Take no offense by this...I'm just trying to see it from the CO's perspective.

Wyatt - I'm sorry, but I really have to disagree with you. In order to file for DCF, you HAVE to have a visa or PR of some sort. I have not heard of any other consulate that requires you to give up your PR card in order to prove that you have an intention to move. Hell, who is going to go through this process if they didn't have any intention of moving?

And realistically, this interviewer seems to go in with his mind already made up without even looking at the interviewee's documentation - it is probably the same guy who interviewed Simistar - but she forced the proof to be seen. Her husband had a job offer, though.

[trailmix 77]

Thanks, Trailmix. I think you're right that he doesn't understand the requirement to establish domicile, but in the end, everything is up to the interviewer, I guess. I have never seen anywhere that an immigrant visa is a "family reunification visa," either, so I don't know why he has that belief. I told him that I didn't want to be separated from my spouse and he said, "Well, I've been separated from MY spouse." Ummmm....not sure what that has to do with anything.

He told me that I do have several "checks" on the U.S. side of things regarding establishing domicile, but the one "check" on the Canada side, having a Canadian PR Card, prevented him from issuing the visa. At first, he said he couldn't REQUIRE me to relinquish the card, but then later said that without relinquishing it, we wouldn't get the visa issued unless I got a job in the U.S. What if we live in the U.S. for a couple years and want to move back to Canada? I don't think it should be at his discretion to require I give up the card because as Mal posted, it's not really their business.

Wyatt, I don't necessarily disagree with some of your points actually - I don't see a lot of proof of 'reestablishing' domicile here either. However, this CO did not ask Dalene to provide more proof, he told her to relinquish her Canadian PR and move to the U.S.

His comment about having been separated from his spouse is also way out of line.

Yes, I agree that it is up to the CO at the day and that they do in fact have a lot of reign in what is approved and accepted and what is not. However - they cannot make up their own rules - well in general - I guess this guy can.

So have you decided what you are going to do?

Edited November 24, 2009 by trailmix

[Lenie7 0]

Dalene, who was the person interviewing you? Let's see it if is not one and the same person who interprets facts the same way to the disadvantage of the applicants?

And I am on the same page with trailmix, super ticked off by this particular interpretation. There is no way anyone, especially US Consulate, that can demand you give up your Canadian permanent resident card...

I also wanted to say that this part really makes me mad. I have seen this a few times - the whole - this is a reunification visa - which somehow discounts the whole reestablishing domicile guidelines??

To say it is a reunification visa and to then turn around and say - and now your spouse must leave the country without you is entirely hypocritical.

ok, enough said, but it really ticks me off.

I went to look at Danu's thread as she was there with me. Apparently, it was the head consular guy, Paul Mayer as it seemed he was the only interviewer yesterday. He seems to be especially nice to k visa people, but since that is considered a non-immigrant visa, I'm sure the interview is less stringent.

[Malrothien 6]

Dalene, who was the person interviewing you? Let's see it if is not one and the same person who interprets facts the same way to the disadvantage of the applicants?

And I am on the same page with trailmix, super ticked off by this particular interpretation. There is no way anyone, especially US Consulate, that can demand you give up your Canadian permanent resident card...

I also wanted to say that this part really makes me mad. I have seen this a few times - the whole - this is a reunification visa - which somehow discounts the whole reestablishing domicile guidelines??

To say it is a reunification visa and to then turn around and say - and now your spouse must leave the country without you is entirely hypocritical.

ok, enough said, but it really ticks me off.

I went to look at Danu's thread as she was there with me. Apparently, it was the head consular guy, Paul Mayer as it seemed he was the only interviewer yesterday. He seems to be especially nice to k visa people, but since that is considered a non-immigrant visa, I'm sure the interview is less stringent.

Really? That's very surprising to hear.

Did he look like this guy?

http://www.rwallenberg-int.org/Events/Mayer.htm

[Lenie7 0]

Thanks, Trailmix. I think you're right that he doesn't understand the requirement to establish domicile, but in the end, everything is up to the interviewer, I guess. I have never seen anywhere that an immigrant visa is a "family reunification visa," either, so I don't know why he has that belief. I told him that I didn't want to be separated from my spouse and he said, "Well, I've been separated from MY spouse." Ummmm....not sure what that has to do with anything.

He told me that I do have several "checks" on the U.S. side of things regarding establishing domicile, but the one "check" on the Canada side, having a Canadian PR Card, prevented him from issuing the visa. At first, he said he couldn't REQUIRE me to relinquish the card, but then later said that without relinquishing it, we wouldn't get the visa issued unless I got a job in the U.S. What if we live in the U.S. for a couple years and want to move back to Canada? I don't think it should be at his discretion to require I give up the card because as Mal posted, it's not really their business.

His comment about having been separated from his spouse is also way out of line.

Yes, I agree that it is up to the CO at the day and that they do in fact have a lot of reign in what is approved and accepted and what is not. However - they cannot make up their own rules - well in general - I guess this guy can.

So have you decided what you are going to do?

I guess I haven't decided what our next steps are. At first, I thought I would just give up my PR card, but now I think I might sign up for school or get a job. It seems as though those are my only options since I feel like I gave a ton of evidence.

Edited November 24, 2009 by Dalene

[Lenie7 0]

Dalene, who was the person interviewing you? Let's see it if is not one and the same person who interprets facts the same way to the disadvantage of the applicants?

And I am on the same page with trailmix, super ticked off by this particular interpretation. There is no way anyone, especially US Consulate, that can demand you give up your Canadian permanent resident card...

I also wanted to say that this part really makes me mad. I have seen this a few times - the whole - this is a reunification visa - which somehow discounts the whole reestablishing domicile guidelines??

To say it is a reunification visa and to then turn around and say - and now your spouse must leave the country without you is entirely hypocritical.

ok, enough said, but it really ticks me off.

I went to look at Danu's thread as she was there with me. Apparently, it was the head consular guy, Paul Mayer as it seemed he was the only interviewer yesterday. He seems to be especially nice to k visa people, but since that is considered a non-immigrant visa, I'm sure the interview is less stringent.

Really? That's very surprising to hear.

Did he look like this guy?

http://www.rwallenberg-int.org/Events/Mayer.htm

That doesn't look like him, so I think maybe it was someone else. I do think we all had the same guy, though. I wish I had asked his name, but I didn't name because I was upset and he wanted us to leave - I wish I had.

Edited November 24, 2009 by Dalene

[trailmix 77]

That doesn't look like him, so I think maybe it was someone else. I do think we all had the same guy, though. I wish I had asked his name, but I didn't name because I was upset and he wanted us to leave - I wish I had.

The K1 interviewees have said that he was the person interviewing them if I remember correctly - so if this picture is not of the guy that interviewed you then you were not interviewed by Paul Mayer.

That's good news because if it was him then we can just take the reestablishing domicile guidelines and toss them.

[ScooterMac 2]

That doesn't look like him, so I think maybe it was someone else. I do think we all had the same guy, though. I wish I had asked his name, but I didn't name because I was upset and he wanted us to leave - I wish I had.

The K1 interviewees have said that he was the person interviewing them if I remember correctly - so if this picture is not of the guy that interviewed you then you were not interviewed by Paul Mayer.

That's good news because if it was him then we can just take the reestablishing domicile guidelines and toss them.

Not all us K-1 folks, though. That was definately not the guy who interviewed us.

[Malrothien 6]

That doesn't look like him, so I think maybe it was someone else. I do think we all had the same guy, though. I wish I had asked his name, but I didn't name because I was upset and he wanted us to leave - I wish I had.

The K1 interviewees have said that he was the person interviewing them if I remember correctly - so if this picture is not of the guy that interviewed you then you were not interviewed by Paul Mayer.

That's good news because if it was him then we can just take the reestablishing domicile guidelines and toss them.

Hopefully he reads this and talks to this interviewer.

[Wyatt's Torch 45]

Wyatt - I'm sorry, but I really have to disagree with you. In order to file for DCF, you HAVE to have a visa or PR of some sort. I have not heard of any other consulate that requires you to give up your PR card in order to prove that you have an intention to move. Hell, who is going to go through this process if they didn't have any intention of moving?

But Dalene didn't go the DCF route, did she? I'm wondering if that's the underlying reason for the rejection -- perhaps she should have gone the DCF route since she's living in Canada as a Permanent Resident?

I guess I'm just a bit confused.

[trailmix 77]

Not all us K-1 folks, though. That was definately not the guy who interviewed us.

Yes, I should have clarified. What I meant was that this picture seems to be a pretty good likeness of Paul Mayer, as in many K1's have now identified him from that pic - so if Dalene says that wasn't him - well that's good news.

Yes Malrothien, I hope that is the case too.

Edited November 24, 2009 by trailmix

[Rustbelt 0]

This goes against every piece of legal advice I've had (I had similar concerns as Steve was a Canadian PR). I don't understand why there is a DCF option if the sole intention is to "reunite" families. Just do away with the DCF in that case . . .

I don't know where you're located, but consider finding work/attending school right over the border so that you're not too far away from each other. It sucks and costs money, but may be your only option.

Some CLARIFICATION from Montreal would be nice: what proof exactly is required for "reestablishing domicile", and what does your Canadian status have to do with your spouse's US status anyway???? You can hardly give up your Canadian PR status when filing for DCF on the basis of the US visa application. Too much risk.

- Steve's wife

[Malrothien 6]

Wyatt - I'm sorry, but I really have to disagree with you. In order to file for DCF, you HAVE to have a visa or PR of some sort. I have not heard of any other consulate that requires you to give up your PR card in order to prove that you have an intention to move. Hell, who is going to go through this process if they didn't have any intention of moving?

But Dalene didn't go the DCF route, did she? I'm wondering if that's the underlying reason for the rejection -- perhaps she should have gone the DCF route since she's living in Canada as a Permanent Resident?

I guess I'm just a bit confused.

It doesn't really matter, since the DCF ends up with a CR1/IR1 visa. The domicile rules are the same for both, too.