VJ members(USC and Beneficiaries) vs Lagos Consulate

[momov31 2]

This popped up in my "recent topics" which is why I'm gunna respond.

I agree that it's unfair that the US government is the one that "decides" who we're allowed to be with, BUT I don't think it's fair to say that they should let it slide because they're the "gateway" to the US. Once they're in, they're in so it's a big risk on their shoulders if they let someone dodgy in. I know I personally would feel bad if I find out that I let someone through like in "Enlighted One's" case.

I think the best measure would be to alter the immigration laws. So rather than a denial in more ambiguous cases, they should simply put them on probation and make it harder to get LPR.

"Nwanyioma" said that Enlighted wouldn't have said what she did if her guy hadn't been a #### but the comment can equally be reversed. if you found out your situation ended up like hers you would be upset and pissed that you were used and abused for a greencard. For that reason it needs to be harder to get a greencard. It should be simple, if you don't remain with your spouse then leave the US. If you're naturalised then fine, stay if it doesn't work out, but make it 5 years to get naturalised. If you're an LPR and it ends in divorce, go home. If you're abused, go home. It's pretty simple. Maybe set a timeframe like MUST remain together for a minimum of 5 years. I don't know many people that can "fake" a relationship for 5 years.

I gave up a lot to come to the US but I would go home in a heartbeat if it turned out my husband abused me, or whatever. It's hard to express exactly what I think without writing a huge post but basically it's this:

- "flag" those relationships you're not 100% sure off

- deny the relationship you ARE sure are dodgy (proof of lies or whatever)

- in the flagged relationships make the AOS harder to obtain, or the ROC. Keep track of them. Visit randomly to inspect their residence.

This allows loved ones to be together but if it doesn't work out then the USC is protected and so is the US government.

So going by ur flags if u cheated on or lied to ur husband they should ship u back to where u came from and u would happliy go. I dont think it would be so easy. The fact that people r being treated like they r less than human at the lagos embassy is the real issue, being scammed is not. What do we do with the peole that scam us that r born and raised in the USA where do we ship them. I say do ur job but do it in fairness, If u were scammed which i cant say u were because the man could have come here and was mistreated by u, then im sorry it happens. I dont know what went on in the house. Example: When he gets here all u can say is my house, my computer and more my this and that. Who wants to live with that so he leaves and the woman cries he scammed me, so do we ship him back because the woman was a controlling, selfish person I dont believe we should. Every person that cries scam has not been scammed they have just been dumped and cant handle that. I can only go by my on situation and pray that all works out if it doesnt then it doesnt, i havent lost my life to any man and dont plan to start now. But the embassy should really be fair in their judgement about the relationship that pass through there. Be blessed and put GOD first.

[momov31 2]

Not every nigerian is a potential scammer. Even if couples were to remain married for more than 5years and the foreign spouse decides to leave the marriage afterwards, the/she will still be labeled a scammer by the United States Spouse.

Scorned USC calling the embassy every minute does not help legitmate relationships. Its more like wanting other people to suffer for your loss (IMO). Pick up the pieces and move on with ur life. You learn from ur mistakes.

[LOLAs 1]

What can we do about it? How can we effect change?

We want the consulate to do their job in protecting the U.S honor, but we do not want them to ruin our lives and make us reach menopause before having a chance to be with the love of our life. I do not think that the consulars understand the gravity of the job that is given to them and the impact that it has on our lives. It can literally make one commit suicide after all the long process that one has endured in this process only to be disappointed at the last minute. I really wish that our voice can be heard in a way that will bring attention to this issue. If there is anyone here that works as a reporter or know someone that work in the media, writing an article about this can be a start.

Really the consulate bully strategy is not efficient otherwise we will not be having a lot of scammers getting through them. I think the reason why there are so many scam complaints is because the genuine applicants are getting denied while the scammers are getting approved. I mean, just imagine the terrorist boy who got his visa from the U.K, he is the perfect example of how they deny well meaning people visas but grants the scammers. Most Nigerian students in U.K can never get visiting visa to the U.S on the basis that they have no ties to U.K but the terrorist can, because he has valuable assets either stolen by his parents from Nigeria government or earned by them, and we all knew what happened. The same goes for the so called scammers, they can tell a very good lie and the embassy will buy it but a faithful person who genuinely forgot his wife's birthday will be denied. It is just a no brainer. The embassy need a lot of native intelligence if they want to stop scammers, decades of the bullying, degrading, and distruptive strategy doesn't appear to stop scammer at all. I do not need to find out all what happened to @enlighten one, the hubby history said it all. Maybe @enlightenone was a victim, I am not totally sure because there were clearly some things she decided not to bother about based on her story.

As I awaits my husband's interview, I am full of tension and fear. I have nothing to hide but so were many others who had their heart broken. For me it is critical, any negative thing can ... I just cannot take it anymore, I have been waiting for over 4 years and I have reached my limit at this time.

[damilola 0]

I dey hear your gist but no one said that all of the 221g's issued in Lagos are due to the bonafide marriage issue. Some of us are delayed for a piece of paper that they aren't even collecting or only taking a glance at once its presented.

I don't feel we are attacking the employees and if some of us want to question their practices we can. We have a right to determine whether people are being treated fairly at the Lagos consulate or if there is an abuse of power. Just because someone is doing their job doesn't mean they are being fair and impartial.

I for 1 am thankful they are doing their job but that doesn't change the fact that we have a right to marry the person of our choosing... even in the US we can marry a murderer, inmate, pedophile.. drug dealer... crackhead etc.. Its our choice and unless the person is a security risk or risk to society why deny us or delay our desire to wed.

This is not about the CO and their wish to be 100/100 on their approval success record and they need to accept the fact that they won't "get all the bad people". This is not a soap opera this is our lives, our families lives, and our kids lives and ultimately its OUR CHOICE how we decide who we wish to create a life with not the embassy. In addition, I'm not seeing the same level of denials or issuances of 221g's in other regional threads that are considered fraud risks.

USCIS asked for certain documents and if you provided what is required why is there a problem. As with any other US government agency that was created to SERVE its people you wait in line to submit what they've outlined and you get what you apply for... objectively. If they were really trying to protect us they would put additional roadblocks on permanent residency or the non-USC's ability to petition for another from their home countries not impeding our choice to START a family. Its the petitioners choice... whether they make a good or bad 1 as to the person's character. Bad marriage choices happen here too. Most of us our intelligent people. We have suffered a broken heart before and we don't need the embassy step-parenting our choice of a 'good spouse.'

Now, we are looking into how I could move there for a while to meet their subjective idea while we get started on our life. Because of paper addiction I feel I am being forced to suspend my career indefinitely and possibly ruin myself financially to marry someone that is not a threat to others. Obviously, it would have been easier for us to settle here but for us settling here was always an option to begin with, not a requirement.

All in all, the CO's are wrong when they delay applicants for nonsense reasons.

[damilola 0]

HELLO HONEY HUMMINGBIRD

INFACT AM SO HAPPY ABOUT THE ISSUE RAISED AND AV BEEN READING THROUGH VJS BUT TO QUICKLY AGREE WITH YOUR STATEMENTS WITHOUT EVEN READING TO THE LAST WORD OF YOURS.

I AM PROUD OF YU ALL.

AS I DO TELL PEOPLE THAT U.S.AIMMIGRATION PROCESS IS THERE TO BRAKE MARRIAGE,HOMES AND RELATIONSHIP AS TO WHAT THEY R USE TO IN THEIR COUNTRY.

THE PROCESS RIGHT FROM USCIS DOWN TO THE EMBASSY IS JUST A SAD JOURNEY WHICH IN REALISTIC SHOULD NOT AV TAKEN MORE THAN 1MONTH.IF YU ONLY THE SO WORLD POWER IS REALY READY TO LEARN FROM THE BRITISH COS THEIR OWN PROCESS DONT TAKE MUCH AND THE DENIALS IS SO LOW TO NOTHING COMPARED TO,AND WHAT DO YU THINK OF THE ASIAN LADY WHO IS GETING SO MUCH POPULARITY.

MY JOURNEY STARTED FROM 2007 JUNE AND STILL ON IT TILL TODAY.

ANYWAYS YU GUYS THAT R USC SHOULD ORGANIZE YUR SELVES ON OUR HALF.

THANKS AND TAKIA

[NigeriaorBust 4,087]

The mandate of the consular officer is to examine the APPROVED petition and the additional evidence presented of a continued relationship. The fact that they have an APPROVED petition in their hand means that the USC has meant the burden required by the statues of showing a relationship exists. The consular officer is NOT supposed to re adjudicate the petition. They are supposed to ask questions to validate that USCIS didn't overlook anything because USCIS did not have the opportunity to do a face to face. By saying we don't call enough they are on voliation of their mandate. It is not about the quality of the relationship. They by statue only have the power to reject issuing the visa if there is PROOF that USCIS missed something. In a heavily front loaded petition they should be powerless. Why are our significant others expected to answer the hardest of questions when others just get asked questions meant for a child?

Here are the actual words we should all take a copy of this with section 7 highlighted when we go and present it to them as soon as they give signs of giving trouble. Also we should start having our partners asking for Name and badge number at the start of the interview. Let them know we are informed about what the code allows.

SUBJECT: GUIDANCE ON PETITION REVOCATIONS

REF: AIRGRAM M-240

1. SUMMARY: From time to time, most posts have occasion to return IV and petition-based NIV petitions to the approving USCIS service centers to request reconsideration and revocation. Posts should be judicious about returning petitions, since the revocation process is lengthy and the evidentiary standard that must be met to sustain a petition revocation is relatively high. Posts should not use the revocation request process as a means of disposing of problematic cases in which fraud, misrepresentation, or ineligibility for status is only suspected but cannot be clearly established. When posts have determined that a petition merits a revocation request, the case should be returned to the approving service center quickly to avoid lengthy delays in processing. To help posts with this process, CA/VO/F/P and CA/FPP are currently working with USCIS to develop a standard petition return memo and guidelines for writing effective revocation memos. END SUMMARY.

Be judicious in returning petitions

------------------------------------------------------

2. Several months ago, CA/VO/F/P conducted an informal survey of posts'' petition revocation processes to determine post practices and needs in regard to revocation requests. We learned that, for the most part, posts return relatively few petitions to USCIS for revocation. This is a positive practice from our perspective, since as a general rule petitions should only be returned to USCIS when fraud or misrepresentation or ineligibility for status can be clearly established or when the petition merits automatic revocation because of such circumstances as the death of the petitioner.

3. 9 FAM 42.43 provides general guidance on preparation of memos to USCIS requesting revocation of IV petitions. Separate sections in 9 FAM 41 on petition-based NIV categories (H, K, L, O, P) provide similar guidance on when to return those petitions. In all cases the guidance Amphasizes that USCIS approval of a petition is prima facie evidence of the applicant''s entitlement to visa status, and that consular officers should not attempt to readjudicate petitions. Rather, a consular officer should only seek revocation of the petition if the officer knows, or has reason to believe, that the petition approval was obtained through fraud, misrepresentation or other unlawful means, or that the beneficiary is not entitled to the status conferred by the petition. Petitions generally should not be returned unless the post uncovers new information not known to USCIS at the time of petition approval. The FAM cautions that posts should seek revocations "sparingly," to avoid inconveniencing the petitioners and applicants and to avoid creating an additional administrative burden for USCIS.

4. Providing solid evidence of fraud or misrepresentation in a petition relationship may not be achievable in many cases, particularly those involving marriage or relationship fraud. The FAM guidance on revocations makes this point on several occasions -- posts seeking revocations must show the "factual and concrete reasons for revocation." USCIS has asked us to remind consular officers that revocation requests must provide solid, factual evidence of fraud or misrepresentation, evidence that is likely to stand up in a court of law. In the case of sham marriages, for example, 9 FAM 42.43 N2.2 notes that USCIS requires at the least either documentary evidence that money changed hands between the petitioner and beneficiary or factual evidence that would convince "a reasonable person" that the marriage was entered into solely to evade immigration laws. Without such evidence, USCIS will be unlikely to obtain a petition''s revocation if a petitioner chooses to contest a notice of intent to revoke.

No "deep sixing"

----------------

5. Posts should not return petitions to USCIS based on mere suspicion or as a substitute for making a decision at post. If the evidence of fraud, misrepresentation, or ineligibility for status is strong enough to lead to a likely revocation, returning the petition would be warranted. However, if post believes the evidence is not likely to lead to a revocation and returning the petition would be a wasted exercise, the petition should not be returned. Returning cases that are only suspect or that appear too complex to figure out is not appropriate and only increases USCIS'' administrative burden and prevents the applicants and petitioners in these cases from obtaining the timely decision on their petitions to which they are entitled.

Use 221(g) with IV cases

------------------------

6. Please keep in mind the differences between revocation of the petition and denial of the visa application. In the absence of hard, factual evidence of fraud, misrepresentation, or ineligibility for status, consular sections are advised to issue the visa, assuming the alien is otherwise qualified, or if further investigation is warranted and holds a potential for resolving post''s concerns, use a 221(g) refusal to obtain additional information. Posts should be generous in allowing applicants every opportunity to supplement their applications following a 221(g) refusal. Many consular sections polled by VO reported that they usually use 221(g) rather than petition return to USCIS as the most effective way of handling cases in which fraud is suspected and where further Information-gathering is likely to be able to resolve the doubts one way or the other.

7. VO supports this use of 221(g) with IV petitions, as returning a petition based on suspicion alone is not appropriate, and providing the applicant an opportunity to address post''s doubts is a fairer way of dealing with suspect cases. We encourage posts to use 221(g), except in those IV cases in which fraud, misrepresentation, or ineligibility for status can be clearly established. 221(g) allows petitioners and beneficiaries to supplement the initial application and in many cases overcome the refusal. Per 22 CFR (9 FAM) 42.83(b), if an applicant fails to present evidence purporting to overcome the basis for the 221(g) refusal within one year of the refusal, post can initiate 203(g) termination procedures (9 FAM 42.83 N1.2).

8. 221(g) may also be appropriate for NIV petition cases. However, posts should note that there is no 203(g) termination process for NIV cases. If post obtains information not known to USCIS at time of petition approval which indicates that an applicant is not eligible for the visa category covered by the petition, the petition should be returned to the approving service center in accordance with FAM guidelines pertaining to the relevant visa category.

Don''t sit on cases

------------------

9. Once post has decided that a case warrants return to USCIS, the memo requesting revocation should be prepared expeditiously and the case returned as quickly as possible. Keeping a case for a lengthy period because officers do not have time to prepare the revocation memo is not fair to the applicant or petitioner, only invites more work in the long run in the form of congressional inquiries and calls about the case, and can even lead to litigation. It places an unfair burden on the petitioner and beneficiary, who in many cases would choose to contest the revocation but cannot do so until USCIS has received the file and sent a notice of intent to revoke to the petitioner. As a rule of thumb, posts should not allow petitions earmarked for return to USCIS to languish more than a week or two. Our e-mail poll revealed that by-and-large posts are aware of this need for quick processing and are preparing revocation memos with dispatch.

Working with USCIS to develop revocation memo guidelines

------------------------------------------------------

10. CA/VO/F/P and CA/FPP are currently working with USCIS to develop a consular return cover worksheet which posts will be able to use in returning petitions meriting revocation to the approving service centers. We are also developing guidelines which posts can use in preparing effective revocation memos that will satisfy USCIS'' evidentiary requirements and thus most likely lead to a successful guidelines which posts can use in preparing effective revocation memos that will satisfy USCIS'' evidentiary requirements and thus most likely lead to a successful revocation. We hope to be able to post this guidance on the Intranet later this summer.

11. Minimize considered.

POWELL

[Enlighten one :) 5]

Enlighten one,

You are very courageous for sharing your story for how your husband scammed you. With that being said let me ask you a question: If you were to be in our shoes (that is your husband is issued a 221g or is denied and he didnt scam you) will you have posted what you posted today? I strongly doubt that. I personally dont think that its up to the CO's to determine if your SO is a possible scammer.

Nwanyioma

Ah, but my husband was in 221G. And I maintained the same attitude as I have through our AP. If you read through my post when he was in AP. REad all my post in the AP tracker thread. I said it is just another part of the process.

I am always suportive of people here, but know the number of fraud cases I have to also speak the truth or play devel's advicate. I know of more fraud cases then are posted on this site. People are too embarrased to post their stories.

[Enlighten one :) 5]

I like this Idea!!!I think the best measure would be to alter the immigration laws. So rather than a denial in more ambiguous cases, they should simply put them on probation and make it harder to get LPR.

I was in AP and had the same opionion as I do now knowing what I know. You can read my past comments]

"Nwanyioma" said that Enlighted wouldn't have said what she did if her guy hadn't been a #### but the comment can equally be reversed. if you found out your situation ended up like hers you would be upset and pissed that you were used and abused for a greencard. For that reason it needs to be harder to get a greencard. It should be simple, if you don't remain with your spouse then leave the US. If you're naturalised then fine, stay if it doesn't work out, but make it 5 years to get naturalised. If you're an LPR and it ends in divorce, go home. If you're abused, go home. It's pretty simple. Maybe set a timeframe like MUST remain together for a minimum of 5 years. I don't know many people that can "fake" a relationship for 5 years.

I gave up a lot to come to the US but I would go home in a heartbeat if it turned out my husband abused me, or whatever. It's hard to express exactly what I think without writing a huge post but basically it's this:

- "flag" those relationships you're not 100% sure off

- deny the relationship you ARE sure are dodgy (proof of lies or whatever)

- in the flagged relationships make the AOS harder to obtain, or the ROC. Keep track of them. Visit randomly to inspect their residence.

This allows loved ones to be together but if it doesn't work out then the USC is protected and so is the US government.

[del-2-5-2014 1,339]

Hello VJ Members,

I find it very disturbing that each time I come on this website, Im seeing more denials and 221g being issued at the Lagos Consulate which I think is becoming ridiculous . And to be honest its quite disheartening and very frustrating. Im really tempted to start some type of petition/complaint against the Lagos Consulate because all of this has got to stop. The reason why these CO's at the Lagos Consulate are playing "God" with our lives/future to be with our SO is because I dont think we (especially the USC petitioners) arent making any formal complaints. whicg they are using to their advantage to frustrate couples. Granted Lagos Consulate is famous for being known to be a "High Fraud Consulate" but dont you think that its insulting for our own American citizens to judge us and the ones we love "scammers"? Something needs to be done about this and fast.

A bit of an old thread I know.

Where do you suggest that we make formal complaints?

[NigeriaorBust 4,087]

At the consulate level they are under Department of Homeland Security. How to file complaints with DHS

Note they think you should start with USCIS or an infopass appointment . What a joke

[milimelo 4,478]

At the consulate level they are under Department of Homeland Security. How to file complaints with DHS

Note they think you should start with USCIS or an infopass appointment . What a joke

Umm no - Department of State is separate from Department of Homeland Security. Embassies and consulates - Department of State.

USCIS, ICE, CBP - Department of Homeland Security.

Gowon - sorry about your visa denial for fiancee - I'd call up the embassy and do whatever you can to keep the petition there - doubt it's shipped back to the US that fast. Then get on your congressman/senator and ask them to write to the consul and ask for a second interview. Make sure you are at that second interview - if they won't let you in, have your fiancee have your passport in hand to show the interviewer.

[NigeriaorBust 4,087]

Umm no - Department of State is separate from Department of Homeland Security. Embassies and consulates - Department of State.

USCIS, ICE, CBP - Department of Homeland Security.

Gowon - sorry about your visa denial for fiancee - I'd call up the embassy and do whatever you can to keep the petition there - doubt it's shipped back to the US that fast. Then get on your congressman/senator and ask them to write to the consul and ask for a second interview. Make sure you are at that second interview - if they won't let you in, have your fiancee have your passport in hand to show the interviewer.

Gowan is in the US , per the consulate the immigration officers are under immigration and under DHS while the rest of it ( about USC'a and governement) is DOS

[TJandJR 69]

Wooo-eeey. This thread is jumping all over the place. But its very interesting and concerns all of us. If I'm understanding the original intent, the problem is Lagos is issuing a disproportionate amount of 221g's and denials based on their personal judgements and suspicions without anything "evidentiary" (wheres the spell check?)to back it up. And there is no one overseeing them and no system in place to successfully file a complaint that brings satisfactory and timely results. True, some have had bad experiences once their hubby or fiance has arrived here, but that's not the point. And it supports the complaint that their current methods arent working. The point is... what duties and limited powers are they (Lagos consulate) suppose to have and are they abusing their power and excercisin powers they arent even suppose to have. The memo sent to the Consulates that was posted is very interesting. Especially

"Amphasizes that USCIS approval of a petition is prima facie evidence of the applicant''s entitlement to visa status, and that consular officers should not attempt to readjudicate petitions."

and

"Petitions generally should not be returned unless the post uncovers new information not known to USCIS at the time of petition approval."

"...posts seeking revocations must show the "factual and concrete reasons for revocation." USCIS has asked us to remind consular officers that revocation requests must provide solid, factual evidence of fraud or misrepresentation, evidence that is likely to stand up in a court of law."

"...factual evidence that would convince "a reasonable person" that the marriage was entered into solely to evade immigration laws. Without such evidence, USCIS will be unlikely to obtain a petition''s revocation if a petitioner chooses to contest a notice of intent to revoke."

Contest? How do you contest? Which court of law? I thought, from readin a lot of stuff here at VJ, that there is no appeal process. That Lagos Consulate has the final say and their is no review of their denial. I forgot the correct terminology for it that members use.

"Posts should not return petitions to USCIS based on mere suspicion." Well, that's a joke, isn't it. So is "posts should seek revocations "sparingly," to avoid inconveniencing the petitioners and applicants." How many of you have been "inconvienced" by this visa process?" Another thing so unfair is the thread (or was it a review?) where someone's finace or hubby was tretaed so rudely and lauhed at durin his interview. But interviewees are suppose to be treated with respect. Who can that petitioner file a complaint with? No one that will do anythin about it. That really pisses me off. And my heart oes out to them... and everyone who is sufferin unfairly.

I was thinking about how people contact their senators for help. Maybe there's a couple in one state and two or three in another state. So each senator does not have the full picture of how many legitimate couples are being denied (or 221g) without reasonable cause. If there was just one person that everyone could contact when there is an unsupported denial, then that person might see that there is a problem in Lagos. But who would that person be? I don't know how to fix this problem but I do know that members here (especially those who have been hurt by this problem) are passionate about it enouh to band toether in some course of action. There is power in numbers. But whatever it is, I think everyone needs to be on the same pa*e and contactin* the same person (or people). (Sorry, all of the sudden the alphabet letter that comes after "f" isnt workin* on my keyboard. lol). Also, arent there some class action suits happenin about this? If people would quit bickerin back and forth maybe some can come up with some course of action that a roup of you (or us) can take. This is an interestin thread and it could produce somethin positive if we keep it pointed in that direction.

[del-2-5-2014 1,339]

I for one am certainly energized on this action.

[QueenE 174]

I for one am certainly energized on this action.

Gowon did you figure out what made the CO think your relationship wasnt bona fide