Is this revised plan workable? So many issues!

[wotamuppet 0]

I think I get it now! A complicated case for sure, but I'm sure you'll do the right thing! Arizona is a great place to be

Just a wild thought... Cash on hand can be considered as assets, correct? So, would it perhaps be possible to sell your land up in Canada and put that money into a savings account? You would of course lose out on the income you could get from the property itself, but you wouldn't need to worry about that compelling tie to Canada that may cause you problems later.

Actually I've been doing some more digging this morning and it looks like we would have to sell (even though on paper there's no requirement), I saw this on a forum of Americans living in the UK (I presume with British/EU partners) and wanting to use assets to return home;

"Re: I-864 income/asset requirements

« Reply #10 on: March 11, 2010, 08:13:12 PM »

We just got back from the consulate today and are still unsure about this. They told us we need something like $58,000 in LIQUID assets but when we got back home and looked it up, it says it can be in assets that can be liquidated within 12 months.

Our house is on the market and not yet sold but in the process and they refused to use that as an asset. We have an email back to the consulate now asking for clarification but have been told we need a second sponsor (and health insurance) before they will approve.

It's a tough road that just got a little tougher."

So I guess each consulate can make up their own requirements over and above what is written down, and we have no recourse as they *are* the United States government as far as that country is concerned and answerable to no-one else.

I wonder how they would look upon US property, whether that would have to be sold to be "liquid" funds or whether they would waive that for being in the US (it could, after all, be the petitioner's home!)

I guess if you are using property the best way would be to make sure the income from it met the poverty guidelines, that way it could count as income rather than an asset. Who knows though!!

[wotamuppet 0]

I think your husband will have a hard time showing that his principal residence is in the USA (to meet the terms of the affidavit of support). On the surface, renting a room and not having a job and never having had a previous residence or US employment would be questionable. Add that to the fact that he has always lived in Canada and the only property you guys have will be in Canada. Doesn't make me think he's living in the USA so I don't know why USCIS would buy it.

IMO, you would have an easier time if he actually lived in the USA, got whatever work he could get, and use the value of your assets to make up the difference.

The one part I might do would be to build the cabin on the land, but then I would look at selling everything and seeing if that would be enough cash. But if I already had enough assets, I wouldn't even bother with that. Life is already too short.

I totally understand what you are saying, I am just trying to think of ways to deal with it as best we can.

He's currently renting a room as he's been in town just over a week, it's all he needs right now and his lack of background/credit history would mean most landlords would turn him down and even if they did let him rent he'd have problems getting utilities switched on.

He does have a job (paying 40% over the state minimum wage) but it's agency work. Possibly in time he could apply for a job with the company he's temping for. Agency work isn't permanent so no good for the I-864, and our assets won't make up the difference. If they did we'd be laughing.

He is living in the USA. He has registered for everything there and "de-registered" in Canada.

He really doesn't want to go back to Canada unless it's the only option. Which it may be. Unfortunately it would be very difficult (likely impossible) for me to visit him in the US now he's living there, he can't come to the UK so the obvious place to meet up would be Canada. Which is along the lines of what I was saying, he takes a vacation whilst maintaining the US as his permanent residence, we build log home, put it up for sale, he returns to US. On paper that appears to be acceptable (yeah...I know lol). He is from a log building background btw. so the whole thing isn't as pie-in-the-sky as it might otherwise sound.

We aren't lying in any way or trying to be "clever"- the problem appears to be that if you look at the guidelines they say one thing but the CO's say something different so you have to think of legal ways to comply whilst thinking outside the box.

He's never had a job or lived there before as he only got citizenship in September '08. It's not that he's had it years and never bothered living there.

We both really would prefer he stays there now he's getting settled and only goes back to Canada on temporary visits, I noticed when I was reading the guidelines on re-establishing domicile they kind of want a job offer, yet that can't be used for 864 purposes so you still need assets/co-sponsors. It sounds like it'd actually be even harder if he leaves.

Possibly (if we are thinking of building to sell i.e for profit) it may be in his interest to think about setting up a company, going to Canada could be viewed as work then, maybe? We would intend to build again when we moved again anyway. Plently of food for thought!

Thanks for your input though, answering people's comments is getting me thinking and getting me into doing further research!

[wotamuppet 0]

One thing I haven't seen mentioned yet is a co-sponsor. I know you said your husband had family issues, but is there anyone in the U.S. that he knows who might be able to co-sponsor you? Just wondering. It might make things easier. My husband lost his job the day I arrived in California. Seriously. So that pretty much effed up our entire plans, and now we have to get a co-sponsor since he has no income.

Sorry to hear about the job loss, is there any luck on the horizon with a new job or a co-sponsor?

Sadly the American side of the family are all either struggling or in bankruptcy or about to be. Tbh once hubs's mother died (when the youngest sibling was only a toddler) there wasn't really much contact with them, his father just had waay too much on his plate bringing up 5 kids and runnng a business too. They're on his Facebook, seems a bit rude to PM people that are virtual strangers asking for sponsorship though lol.

[trailmix 77]

He has tried to get work where he is (just to test the water) but keeps coming up against the same problem, he cannot background check (also credit check, if the job requires this). The only work he can get is casual, with an agency. Obviously this isn't acceptable for sponsorship purposes. This is further compounded by the fact he always worked in the family business so has pretty specialised skills, and also he can't provide impartial references. He's only going for minimum wage jobs, even dishwashers are being asked for 1-2 years verifiable experience, 3 references and background checks!!

I understand what you are saying about the reference checks, that could be a bit of a problem as he was working in a family business (although if it were me I would certainly ask for them), however I meant to ask you about the credit check and background check. What is the problem there?

When we moved my Husband had no credit in the U.S. and no 'background' - but his first job in the U.S. was for a government agency who did all of those checks - I mean they just come back with nothing of course, but isn't that the point haha.

[wotamuppet 0]

I understand what you are saying about the reference checks, that could be a bit of a problem as he was working in a family business (although if it were me I would certainly ask for them), however I meant to ask you about the credit check and background check. What is the problem there?

When we moved my Husband had no credit in the U.S. and no 'background' - but his first job in the U.S. was for a government agency who did all of those checks - I mean they just come back with nothing of course, but isn't that the point haha.

I must admit I was pretty surprised about the background and credit check thing, being a Brit where everything that divulges personal information is shrouded in a veil of secrecy lol it seemed soooo intrusive. There's actually a really good thread started by someone on the Arizona forum on city-data who has moved there and is having a really hard time with background and credit checking (for a job), a very interesting read.

I've seen it suggested that employers are using all these checks as a way of discriminating against people which otherwise the law would prevent them from doing. Also, in an area where there's a flood of workers for no matter what job it's a good way of reducing numbers of applicants.

Why I wondered would you need a credit check to work in a supermarket cleaning floors in the middle of the night? Because if you have bad credit you may be tempted to steal. Talk about good old-fashioned prejudice!

And blank background checks can be a problem (clearly it depends on the employer-if it's a decent job and the person is what they are looking for etc etc like your hubs they can waive it but for a minimum wage job-unless they're into employing illegals-they likely won't).

When hubs was on the road or staying in motels I did jobsearching on his behalf and would call and ask outright if it would be a problem, basically for a labor type job they just wouldn't bother, almost like they were afraid of why he had left his home country...like he had something to hide, maybe he was a murderer on the run or something...total paranoia lol.

I used to be a regular on a forum for Brits going to the US on investor business visas, they used to have it really hard when they first arrived and used to say that having *no* credit was worse than BAD credit. Once again, it's what *could* have happened overseas.

It's a shame there's not a "banging head against wall" smiley on here...think I would've worn it out by now lol.

[trailmix 77]

Interesting about the checks...maybe he needs to move to a different state!

So I guess each consulate can make up their own requirements over and above what is written down, and we have no recourse as they *are* the United States government as far as that country is concerned and answerable to no-one else.

That's correct, or what they call - up to each CO what they decide can and cannot be used. Technically:

Can the immigrant visa applicant count assets that he or she owns that are outside the United States, such as real estate or personal property? link

Yes, under these conditions:

The assets must be readily convertible to cash within 12 months

The applicant must show that he/she can take the money or assets out of the country where they are located. Many countries have strict regulations which limit the amount of cash or liquid assets that can be taken out of the country

The assets equal at least five times the difference between the sponsor's income and 125 percent of the poverty line for the household size.

So really you only have two choices. You sell the land and house and if that gives you enough cash assets - all is well. Or you attempt to use the land and house/rental as assets/income and hope the CO on the day accepts it.

Edited March 13, 2010 by trailmix