Denied at the interview? How is this possible?

[Steph1988 11]

I am extremely worried now, very very worried, we just got our case expedited at USCIS stage an was approved an is now at NVC, unfortunately i am in extreme sick health an cant work, so my co sponsor was my dad, he just got a kidney transplant an has been working since he got healthy 2 different jobs since 2010, his latest job he started in February this year, now he makes way over the mark for him an my husband as the sponsor but if your saying they go by length of time at a job to that is very worrying news

[Steph1988 11]

he also was entitled even through working SSI however his last payment was the 1st of this month, his earnings for the year so far are over $28,000 and he lives alone with no co dependents but still this has worried me greatly

[pushbrk 12,903]

I am extremely worried now, very very worried, we just got our case expedited at USCIS stage an was approved an is now at NVC, unfortunately i am in extreme sick health an cant work, so my co sponsor was my dad, he just got a kidney transplant an has been working since he got healthy 2 different jobs since 2010, his latest job he started in February this year, now he makes way over the mark for him an my husband as the sponsor but if your saying they go by length of time at a job to that is very worrying news

They consider the totality of circumstances in evaluating the public charge issue. It's not so much that the "go by" any specific thing. It's a judgment call that tends to be somewhat subjective. In general though, the elderly don't inspire a lot of confidence as sponsors who'll actually be available to provide support or repay the government, should the need arise. In your case, having your own health problems and disability don't inspire confidence either. What are the immigrating spouse's employment prospects?

[Steph1988 11]

They consider the totality of circumstances in evaluating the public charge issue. It's not so much that the "go by" any specific thing. It's a judgment call that tends to be somewhat subjective. In general though, the elderly don't inspire a lot of confidence as sponsors who'll actually be available to provide support or repay the government, should the need arise. In your case, having your own health problems and disability don't inspire confidence either. What are the immigrating spouse's employment prospects?

not disabled, was an emergency op and now need further scanning for cervical cancer, im only 22, my dad ( the hopefully co sponsor ) is 48, not elderly, Well my husband is a college grad with sports and leisure as his course, so anything to do with tourism, sport, that kinda thing, he currently is working as a manager in a bar just now

[pushbrk 12,903]

not disabled, was an emergency op and now need further scanning for cervical cancer, im only 22, my dad ( the hopefully co sponsor ) is 48, not elderly, Well my husband is a college grad with sports and leisure as his course, so anything to do with tourism, sport, that kinda thing, he currently is working as a manager in a bar just now

Sounding better all the time. Realize they are making a judgment about whether the intending immigrant will become a public charge and can consider ANYTHING, when doing so. Provide any information that will help them reach the conclusion he will NOT become a public charge.

[Steph1988 11]

Sounding better all the time. Realize they are making a judgment about whether the intending immigrant will become a public charge and can consider ANYTHING, when doing so. Provide any information that will help them reach the conclusion he will NOT become a public charge.

forgive me for being slow, public charge? as in what do u mean by that? we are trying to cover all bases with my dad as the co sponser, its the mole at the circus effect one pops up u deal with it up pop another too, but as they say no pain no gain, we got the cases expedited due to the emergency op me losing my job and having 2 kids to deal with ill at the time of op alone,

[HS2 7]

The NVC collects the information. The NVC does not evaluate the information. Evaluating the information is done by the CO at the interview.

This is not "another delaying technique." It is the way information collected is evaluated.

The OP did not meet the financial requirements. Her foreign income cannot be counted because it has ended. There is no future money from this particular employment to meet the I-864 obligations in the future. In addition, a new job cannot evidence a history of reliable employment. These were the deficiencies pointed out, and this is why a joint sponsor is needed.

It is neither moronic or a manufactured delay to ask that petitioners show a reliable income history that will continue into the future to meet the I-864 obligations.

OP is stating that has been employed for the past 8 months as a government employee and makes above the 125% poverty guideline. Same situation with me. Previous 2 tax years ( 2008,2009)more than 300% of the poverty guidelines. Never been on unemployment before and sure as hell did not choose on my free will to do so last year. So my employment income between the old and the new job (one month) are not enough to meet the requirement. Adding unemployment benefits will take me above the 125% required. What do you make of this? What happens if no one can help me co-sponsor? This is what i mean by bull***. I understand that someone has to play defense for the other team but who is to say that the Co that is making that judgment call is of sound judgment to begin with. Who is to say that a certain person that made over 100K for the past 10 years will not go on food stamps once the beneficiary is in US? Or the person that is not “meeting " the requirements now will make 100K the following year and will pay enough taxes for all the free loaders that are already born in here and need no sponsorship to be with their spouse or their baby’s momma.

Edited August 4, 2011 by cipollina

[HS2 7]

If you haven't been at your current employer very long that may be the issue. Current and continuing income is what is typically evaluated. Income earned outside the US that is not continuing inside the US would not be considered.

HI

I am trying to figure out what qualifies as" being at your current employer very long" for I-864 purpose

Thanks

[bigdog 376]

I cannot believe that the visa for my husband was denied at the interview. We have been married for eight years, I have a secure job with the federal government and make more than enough to cover our expenses until he can get work. They kept him at the consulate in Juarez all day, and in the end, they pointed to my 1040 tax forms which have my salary as low, because I only worked in the US from August to December, and from August to October I was working part-time only. My substantial earnings in Mexico during the first half of the year don't count apparently. They are requesting a joint financial sponsor for him to be issued a visa. I cannot believe that they cannot consider my current position and salary when making a decision. What a bunch of morons! So now, I have to succumb to their wishes and ask someone else to help out when we don't need it. So awful! I'm so tired of all of this. Don't know what to do now. Any suggestions?

Anh map is right on, also consider a cosponsor.

[Navyk 78]

The minimums are set in stone, in that if they are not met, by sponsor, or joint sponsor, there will be no visa. However, simply meeting the minimums is no indicator of whether the affidavit of support will be deemed sufficient.

All that said, I'm quite surprised that a government employee 8 months into a new job with well over the needed income was asked to provide a joint sponsor.

The current income plays a big role but what is current is always not very clear.

It is neither 2011 annual income nor the income for the immediate last 12 months nor the income for the past 6 months to future 6 months. We have been filling our I-864s with the premise that the current income is what we are getting this month bumpped up annually (for salaried guys).

Further if only current income is considered, what is need for tax returns/ IRS transcripts for the last 3 years (at least past year 2010)! And in cases there is low 2010 income due to a valid reason (like going to school or accident or...), the previous last 2 years income helps in assessing the capability to support.

Bottomline all these only give a broad idea on the capability to support. In this case for some reason the CO is not satisfied - yes, this should have been sttled at NVC level.

On the brighter side - this is much better than keeping the beneficiary on administrative review, wher there is no certainity.

[HS2 7]

ChrisWR

I apologize if i "stole" this thread from you but it is really aggravating when i see some people being ok with a total stranger's judgement calls about people's lives. This process should not allow any room for personal interpretations.If i were a CO at the consulate I might have denied everybody today just because I am having a bad day.I am tired of working my butt off to pay for food stamps for people that are more than capable of work but decide to sit home and have a bunch of babies out of wedlock. Life must be sweet drinking yourself to sleep until noon everyday on my taxes.Some of us are given hell when trying to start a family and a life with someone we love.Go figure

Hope you can work this thing out and get your significant other home with you soon

FYI

I just got off the phone with NVC and for those that are in the same situation as I ( collected unemployment) you should be ok. As long as you paid income tax on those benefits, UI will qualify as income.

[HS2 7]

The NVC collects the information. The NVC does not evaluate the information. Evaluating the information is done by the CO at the interview.

This is not "another delaying technique." It is the way information collected is evaluated.

The OP did not meet the financial requirements. Her foreign income cannot be counted because it has ended. There is no future money from this particular employment to meet the I-864 obligations in the future. In addition, a new job cannot evidence a history of reliable employment. These were the deficiencies pointed out, and this is why a joint sponsor is needed.

It is neither moronic or a manufactured delay to ask that petitioners show a reliable income history that will continue into the future to meet the I-864 obligations.

JoJo

- OP made over 125% of the required income for the 2010 even though the employment history was not consequent

- OP earns ( has been for the past 8 month) more than 125 % of the poverty line

In your opinion what counts as as evidence of reliable employment? Has life been always stable and routine with you?

Do you have a magic ball that shows you will be at the same job for the rest of your life and nothing will interrupt your income?I cant say the same for myself and the people I know.

NVC does not jut collect info.They make sure that Petitioner and Beneficiary both qualify for the benefits they are seeking

I would like to see your time line and the type of petition you are pursuing so I can have a better understanding of your reasons for being in VJ and playing "the devils advocate"

Now that you have all the facts could you please give us a more educated response?

Thank you

Edited August 4, 2011 by cipollina

[Casprd 167]

The problem is that they keep their standards a complete mystery and then you find out only when it is too late. I also was with the understanding that the current income was more important than the previous, but I guess not. It all depends on the immigration official you are stuck with. That person makes the ultimate decision. Good luck to you too.

Keeping the standards somewhat nebulous is by design. There is so much immigration fraud already that if the standards were set in stone then it would be that much easier for the people trying to cheat the system in order to get a visa. Unfortunately it seems if the VO is having a bad day or for any other number of reasons people who should be approved get caught up in this while people who should be denied get through. Hang in there

[pushbrk 12,903]

forgive me for being slow, public charge? as in what do u mean by that? we are trying to cover all bases with my dad as the co sponser, its the mole at the circus effect one pops up u deal with it up pop another too, but as they say no pain no gain, we got the cases expedited due to the emergency op me losing my job and having 2 kids to deal with ill at the time of op alone,

To become a public charge is to require financial report from the public. (taxpayers) The sponsor is obligated to repay the government for means tested benefits accessed by the immigrant but the purpose of evaluating the affidavit of support is to determine whether such a need will be likely in the future or whether the petitioner and/or sponsors will see to it the taxpayers are not burdened by the immigrant's subsistence needs.

[Ryan H 3,812]

There are embassies that do not allow co sponsors,

That is only in K1 cases. In IR/CR-1 cases, the NVC always allows joint sponsors, therefore, joint sponsors are allowed by the Embassy/Consulate.